Showing posts with label Psychiatry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Psychiatry. Show all posts

Monday, May 30

One of the reasons I stopped posting on this platform: Where is the truth?

 

Google, for our protection, safety and, sure, with our best interested at heart, has deleted YouTube videos, entire channels, the search engineer was also altered... in short: there is only one truth.

I have no idea of Eric Blair's, aka George Orwell, opinion about it all; "I told you so!"; "I didn't write a manual."; "Wow, where is the Ministry of Truth? are some possibilities. I'll try a psychic to contact him.

Why am I writing this post? No idea whatsoever for nobody will read it. Just observing and caring on.

 The image shows the post of the video's disappearance and there are loads of videos on this blog alone that was deleted.

The content of the censured video is available - transcription - on Dr David Healy's site and the entire video on Rumble and this site.

Strangely enough a post I did on  a YouTube's video of David Healy's channel was deleted. I wrote about it here.

WATCH BIG BROTHER  WATCHING YOU  

Friday, October 22

My Comment on Youtube was deleted - it is about Psychiatry malpractice



"Thank you Dr. Healy.
You always give the broad picture of everything. Never heard of a physician that put the political, economical and cultural aspect of what they are explaining.

"So tiny and..."  my conclusion is always the opposite: "So tiny and causing so many illness."
I beg your pardon? 20:37 "... market Zoloft neither the names in the authorship line nor the people who run the trial, nor the ghostwriters, nor the FDA or the MHRA will have seen the data from these trials."

"So I´ve written to NICE, and, MHRA, and EMA, and FDA, all the major journals, all the politicians, the minister of health in all the departments of health in the western European archipelago, - that's England and Ireland for those who weren't sure what it is,  - and they all agree that the literature was ghost written and there's no access to the clinical trial data. Their response is to take the escape route that I offered them which is that it's not our job to police the medical literature raising the question of whose job is this."

Stop the world, the planet... the universe.
I'm glad I still have some innocence left and indignation.
Funny that UK Parliament talk about ghost writers in their 2005 review "The Influence of Pharmaceutical Industry".
Suicide ideation not related to the depression but as a side effect is also there."



I saved these comment because I wanted to remember some topics for I thought about posting it here.
Professor David Healy is a great source of knowledge for those who want to understand what is really happening to them and the pills they take.
Research. 
I'll create a tag with his name for there are other posts I quote him.

Monday, April 14

Alison Hymes: the activist before incarceration in Western State Hospital, Virginia




I have been searching for Alison Hymes and found some of her comments in blogs and news organizations. She was a real activist and was really working for accountability in Virginia. Two examples:

Alison Hymes
28 May 2007 at 9:15 am
(here)
Thanks for linking to my blog. I’m Alison Hymes, thus the “Hymes” :), I’m Secretary of Virginia’s Mental Health Planning Council, member of the Advisory Committee for Region Ten’s Wellness Recovery Center (Crisis Stabilization for adults), member of the Taskforce on CIT for Charlottesville/Albemarle and member of the Taskforce on Committment of the Virginia Chief Justice’s Commission on Mental Health Law Reform. I don’t focus on children in the main although I am of course concerned about protecting children from abuse in the MH system as well as adults. If readers have concerns about MH in Virginia relevant to the Planning Council which oversees the federal block grant or in regards to the Commitment Taskforce, I am always interested in hearing from folks. I can be reached at AlisonHymes@spamex.com

LETTER- Thanks for no stigma
Published online 8:00am Thursday Apr 26th, 2007
and in print issue #0617 dated Thursday Apr 26th, 2007

Thank you for not scapegoating people with mental illness in your coverage of the massacre at Virginia Tech ["After the massacre," April 19]. Your coverage was almost unique in not taking the tack of increasing the general public's fear and ignorance about people living with mental illness. Clearly you already know, as apparently the New York Times does not, that people with mental illness are much more likely to be the victims of violent crime than the perpetrators.

Your coverage and its lack of stimatizing people with psychiatric disabilities was a highlight of a very hard week for all of us who work to decrease the prejudice against people with psychiatric labels.

Alison Hymes
Secretary, Virginia Mental Health Planning Council
Albemarle County

She was good an very determined. In other words a trouble.
She was incarcerated and is being a difficult person for psychiatrists, and, even for activists. Bad girl Alison.
There is something strange surrounding this case. Organizations and people who started campaigning for Alison refuse to say why they gave up. Why? How is Alison? No reply. "We do not know. W do not have contact with people who are in mental institutions..." OMY!
If an organization that claims to advocate for those who are in serious problem has started a campaign and after three years says "We don't know. We do not have a staff to do so."
Compliance? Are these the people who fight for a revolution in the medical paradigm?
Behaving like those they are fighting is surely not the right way.
Alison Hymes was silenced,

Friday, March 21

Rio de Janeiro's county hospital Rocha Maia in Brazil released severe injured patient without treatment

















The patient was Maria a homeless woman who is known by those who live around the place she sleeps.
Two citizens took her back  to Rocha Maia Hospital showing the pictures of how they released her and demanded them to treat her.

She sleeps in a place where there are cats and skunks. It is believed that an animal have eaten some of the matter that were exposed.

Maria suffers a mental disease and this is one of many reasons physicians received her on Sunday, 3/16 and released her on Wednesday morning, 3/19 without any treatment.

Close to the hospital there is a mental institution, Pinel Hospital, where Maria goes when she is not felling fine which gives no excuse for the lack of treatment of this woman with the injuries depicted on these photos taken by one of the citizens who helped her. It is a physical condition and should be treated in a hospital.
Of course that if Maria received a good care in the Pinel Hospital she would seek for help there but the way they mistreat those who are inside there prevented her of doing so. I have terrible stories I heard from the patients who have been there. But those who are poor come and go. This is another post.

A dentist went to Rocha Maia Hospital with Maria and this man recording what they had to say about the case.

This was the only way they accepted Maria back to treat her: they feared the camera.
Rocha Maia Hospital is a hospital of the county and for political reasons it has already been closed and started their activities in 2012 but they are not what they were anymore.

There were numerous doctors and the number of people that were there on a daily basis was huge.
Now this is how they are treating Rio de Janeiro's poor citizens.
And this woman suffer the stigma of having a mental condition, a stigma that makes all of those who have a "label" be treated as subhumans.
I can't take it. This is too much for me.

Update:
The injuries were made when Maria took the  Haldol that the Hospital Pinel gave to her. She felt on the floor and passed away. When she woke up she had the injuries, two holes in her head.

Update April, 7:
Maria is in a mental institution where she is being treated. I don't know this hospital. She will stay there till someone responsible for her appears.
That's never gonna happen.


Wednesday, March 5

Wikipedia deleted article on Post-SSRI sexual dysfunction PSSD: hypocrisy and inconsistency






You know, I know, everybody knows that Wikipedia is biased and echoes all official visions even those who leads to genocides and crimes against humanity.

Post-SSRI sexual dysfunction - PSSD - has been reported by many people that  after quitting an antidepressant SSRI don't recover their sexuality. This is a devastating condition that has been discussed since 2005 at the Yahoo group SSRI-sex group. I wrote about them here. and copied a testimony here.

I have already met people that took an antidepressant SSRI while they were teenager and they never experienced sex and will never will.

Wikipedia had an article about it but it is gone now as some bloggers, patients, physicians and those who are aware of the condition have reported.

I will write about PSSD in another post for it is another of many crimes against humanity that these drugs are promoting.
I just want to show the inconsistency of the encyclopedia of the people:

at the article about Citalopram:

Sexual dysfunction is often a side effect with SSRIs. Specifically, common side effects include difficulty becoming aroused, lack of interest in sex, and anorgasmia (trouble achieving orgasm). Genital anesthesia,[36][37] loss of or decreased response to sexual stimuli, and ejaculatory anhedonia are also possible. Although usually reversible, in some people these sexual side effects become permanent after the drug has been completely withdrawn.[38] This is known as post-SSRI sexual dysfunction. One study showed however that when remission of major depressive disorder is achieved, quality of life is reported to be higher in spite of sexual side effects.[39] (emphasys  mine)

36.^ Bolton JM, Sareen J, Reiss JP (2006). "Genital anaesthesia persisting six years after sertraline discontinuation". J Sex Marital Ther 32 (4): 327–30 doi:10.1080/00926230600666410PMID 16709553..
37. ^ "Numb Genitals, Anyone?". Retrieved 9 November 2012.
38. ^ Csoka AB, Csoka A, Bahrick A, Mehtonen OP (January 2008). "Persistent sexual dysfunction after discontinuation of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors". J Sex Med 5 (1): 227–33 doi:10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00630.x.PMID 18173768..
39. ^ Ishak WW, Christensen S, Sayer G, Ha K, Li N, Miller J, Nguyen JM, Cohen RM. Sexual satisfaction and quality of life in major depressive disorder before and after treatment with citalopram in the STAR*D study" J Clin Psychiatry 2013 Mar;74(3) 256-61. doi:10.4088/JCP.12m07933 doi:10.4088/JCP.12m07933.

So, it is very clear at this excerpt from Citalopram that PSSD is a condition that exists:
" in some people these sexual side effects become permanent after the drug has been completely withdrawn"
this is known as PSSD - Post-SSRI sexual dysfunction. The condition is just not named as everybody knows.

At the post I wrote on June, 12, 2009 the article was at Wikipedia and I left the link:

"PSSD has an article at Wikipedia and is reported to physicians. However it seems to be something out of the planet to some doctors."

Now without the article the link goes to Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor with the paragraph I copied above.

If you have ever tried the to talk to Wikipedia task force you know how arrogant and abusive they are.
They use ad hominem and all kind of strategies that are used by those who are defending the official version.
I tried this Talk page and was hypocritically treated.

It is written "The Free Encyclopedia that anyone can edit." This is simply absurd.

I really didn't expect anything from them but just wanted to add another comment among those who have manifested.
Wikipedia is another tool used to manipulate opinion.

Update:
The article on PSSD in Polish is still at Wikipedia. Let's see how much time will it last.
It's here.



Thursday, November 28

Medicine: Doctors leading to your demise


This is a must-see for all of us for it is about how are diseases are being treated.

"Your doctor is one of the agents who is most likely to lead to your demise these days rather than a person who is likely to save you."
Dr. David Healy

"Prescription only arrangements are there to control addictive behaviors.
Doctors have a police function whether they like it or not."
Dr. David Healy

""Drug-induced death is at least the third leading cause of death."
Dr. David Healy



CEO of patients' organisation National Voices Jeremy Taylor, practicing consultant and President of the Royal College of Psychiatry Sue Bailey, and outspoken head of Data Based Medicine Ltd. and Pharmageddon author and psychiatrist David Healy question medical authority.


Tuesday, October 1

Kurt Vonnegut's son talking about ADHD?



I'm amazed that Mark Vonnegut, who had a first maniac episode  the age of twenty two, is
at this conference - ADHD Consensus Conference, 1998 - stammering about what ADHD without being able to put two sentences together.
He wrote two books about his struggle with bipolarity: "The Eden Express: A Memoir of Insanity" and "Just Like Someone Without Mental Illness Only More So: A Memoir".
From someone who has experienced the nonsense of DSM and its practice being in such a conference surrounded by physician eager to prescribe Ritalin to children is something out of this planet for me.


Mark Vonnegut and son


Friday, September 27

Alison Hymes case: you're on your own Alison

This is the answer Senator Mark Warner sent me:

Sen. Mark Warner's Office
25 Sep (2 days ago)
to me

Dear Mrs. Lima,

Thank you for contacting me regarding  your views on the case of Alison Hymes.  As we work in the Senate to meet the enormous challenges facing this country, including efforts to strengthen our economy, create new private sector jobs, reduce the federal deficit and establish energy independence, your views and those of your fellow Virginians are very important to me.

I am honored to serve Virginia as your United States Senator.  My top priority in the Senate is to provide efficient and effective constituent service to all Virginians.  Please be sure that my office will review your comments carefully as I consider and vote on relevant legislation.

Again, thank you for contacting me.  For further information or to sign up for my newsletter please visit my website at http://warner.senate.gov.

Sincerely,
MARK R. WARNER
United States Senator

Clearly this is a message at the Senator sends for all of those who write to him. It is a form and the blanks are just after the words "you views on _________________ ."this time filled with "the case of Alison Hymes".
It is a propaganda and, as always, a "vote for me" requisition.

I have already published the answer of the Virginia's governor Bob McDowell where it is explained how the state and federal is prepared to leave things the way they are: the patient locked and receiving treatments that cannot be revealed.
There are laws, human rights regulators, lawyers, doctors, judges and politicians working to keep people in the loonies. We know that what happens in manicomios. We know how dreadful, heinous and criminal the treatment given to anyone who is labelled a mental disease is.

Mr. Bob McDowell's answer is shameful and should be used as an example of how the system close the doors to any hold the patient's as a subhuman with no right, no habeas corpus.

Alison has already expressed numerous times that the treatment is making her health deteriorate. But she is crazy, isn't she? So she is not supposed to say anything about what they are doing to her body, mind and soul.

She has the right to feel the deterioration like a kidney transplant three years ago,"after lithium toxicity caused renal failure. Psychiatrists refused to treat her kidney problems, and compounded the issue by prescribing Trilafon, a drug that has clear warnings about dangers to renal function. As a result, she has been having difficulty swallowing and has become physically weak."

I lost hope. I lost hope in campaigning, writing to these people, signing petitions... any of these actions mental health advocates usually do.

It doesn't work. Something has to be done but we are on the wrong track.
What we do is just an expression of our revolt and not a way to effectively take people from the hands of their warders.
Alison is alone. She needs a lawyer.

In the meantime:
"After years of planning and $140 million poured into constructing the new Western State Hospital* in Staunton, the managers introduced the state-of-the-art complex to the community Wednesday with a ribbon-cutting ceremony.  (emphasis mine)

Politicians, city leaders and mental health care professionals spoke and celebrated the big day. They're proud of how far treatment has come over the past several decades, and say the new Western State Hospital is a symbol of that growth." (read here)

Tuesday, August 27

How did psychiatric drugs affect your life?







"Going to a psychiatrist has become one of the most dangerous things a person can do."
Peter Breggin, MD







Tuesday, August 20

Alison Hymes case: Second message to governor Bob McDowell, Virginia




I wrote a second message to governor Bob McDowell (right) about Alison Hymes:




Dear Mr. McDowell,

This is the second time I am writing to inform that Alison Hymes is receiving a criminal treatment in Western State Hospital.
As a Brazilian citizen I do not understand how can it be that a woman is left in such situation in a facility that is making her sicker.

This is what Alison Hymes has already endured:

"VIRGINIA WOMAN'S KIDNEY AILMENTS AND BRAIN ANEURYSM IGNORED BY STATE HEALTH OFFICIALS

Woman in psychiatric hospital now suffers a brain aneurysm, is left untreated and neglected, to face death.

A Virginia woman was locked in irons and chains in August, and driven by state police to Western State Hospital, even though she is accused of no crime. A judge ruled then that Alison Hymes may be committed to the state hospital, citing a lack of insight regarding the amount of water she was drinking.

Doctors placed severe restrictions on her food and water and are treating her kidney disorder as a psychiatric condition.

Alison had a kidney transplant three years ago, after lithium toxicity caused renal failure. Psychiatrists refused to treat her kidney problems, and compounded the issue by prescribing Trilafon, a drug that has clear warnings about dangers to renal function. As a result, she has been having difficulty swallowing and has become physically weak.

A friend and advocate had a chilling prediction that may now prove to be true. "At best, Alison won't receive any real medical care for her kidney problems," said Tina, a friend of Alison's and psychiatric advocate in New York said in August. "At worst, I know there is a very real probability that this confinement and lack of medical care will kill her."

NOW it is even more urgent. A brain aneurysm has been discovered, and Alison still sits in a psychiatric ward. Her brain aneurysm could well be causing all of her psychiatric symptoms. If the aneurysm bursts, Hymes will suffer a stroke, and ALL of the psychiatric medications Alison is being given, cause an INCREASED RISK OF STROKE. Yet, Alison has been told that her brain aneurysm will not be treated. This is now a matter of life and death, for a woman with disability, perpetuated and caused by an institution that poses to help.

Her case highlights the failure of the Virginia medical system by continuing to ignore legitimate health problems and trying to mask them with psychiatric drugs that worsen her health and hasten her death."

It happened in 2011 and Dr. Jack Barber was the psychiatrist who said that her aneurysm would not be treated.
What kind of hospital is this?
I am in touch with mental health advocates in America so I know this is not an isolated case but she is in Virginia so I believe that if there is someone who can and may help this woman is Virginia's governor.
I appeal for your mercy and your humanity.
Alison Hymes has already been tortured enough. It is time to set her free so that she can recover from the crimes that are being committed to her in the Western State Hospital.
I believe that this hospital should receive a visit from Virginia state because this is not a hospital. This is a prison.
Thank you very much for your attention.
Sincerelly yours,
Ana Luiza Lima

I just found out that governor Bob McDowell is amid a scandal involving money during his campaign.
Will he have time to think about a citizen that is in such situation?

(first message here.)

Update 10/9/2013

This is the answer from Virginia's government:
Judith Ahern
11:04 (4 minutes ago)

"This is in response to your email to Governor McDonnell regarding Ms. Alison Hymes.

Periodically, friends, advocates and persons on various mailing lists connected to or contacted on behalf of Alison Hymes have conveyed concerns about her care and wellbeing to me and/or members of Congress, the Governor, members of the General Assembly, and staff of the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services (DBHDS).

Federal and state laws prevent disclosure of information about persons served in DBHDS facilities and even whether a specific, named person is being, or has ever been, served.  These laws are designed to protect patients’ privacy and rights to confidentiality.  Information cannot be released to anyone without the informed consent of the person for each and every specific and limited release of any protected information.  Accordingly, I cannot respond to your inquiry except in a general manner.

I can, however, offer some assurances about the care that is provided in state DBHDS facilities.  These hospitals, including Western State Hospital (WSH), are fully accredited by The Joint Commission (a national hospital accreditation and quality assurance organization,http://www.jointcommission.org/) and certified by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Provider-Enrollment-and-Certification/CertificationandComplianc/index.html).  Accreditation involves periodic, unannounced on-site inspections by teams of national hospital experts.  The reviews measure compliance with standards of care concerning every aspect of patient care, including guarantees of patient rights and dignity, adequacy of medical care, and safety concerns.  In addition, each hospital functions under DBHDS Human Rights regulations (http://lis.virginia.gov/000/reg/TOC12035.HTM#C0115) that stipulate the rights that persons served are guaranteed and provide a structure of human rights advocates and committees to resolve complaints.  The vast majority of persons served in DBHDS facilities are committed to DBHDS care by courts under provisions of the Code of Virginia.  These laws prescribe the conditions under which a person may be committed and are conducted by judges, with independent medical evaluators and attorneys for the persons for whom commitment is being proposed.  The rights and service quality of persons served are also protected by the independent oversight of the Office of the State Inspector General and the disAbility Law Center of Virginia (formerly the Virginia Office of Protection and Advocacy).  Finally, persons served may have family or legal aid supporting and advocating to help them.

Virginia’s behavioral health facilities take very seriously their responsibilities to provide the highest quality, recovery-focused care in a safe and supportive environment that fully respects the rights and dignity of the persons we serve.

We appreciate your concern that individual human rights are being honored.  Hopefully, the information above helps allay your concerns."

William A. Hazel, Jr., M.D.
Secretary of Health and Human Resources
1111 East Broad Street
Richmond, Virginia  23219

Allay my concerns... no. This e-mail makes me more concerned and worried but I rather say nothing for the moment.


Friday, August 16

US mental institutions are prisons: Alison Hymes case

We are told over and over again that US is democratic or even that it is the most democratic country. The facts reveals the opposite. We have recently the cases of Brad Manning and Edward Snowden as examples of a regime that is far from being democratic.
Other cases that are not very known involve tasering people till death like what happened to 18 years-old artist Israel Hernandez tasered in the heart till death by Miami police.

If "normal" citizens are being treated this way those who are in mental institutions don't count. Once someone is labelled a mental illness they are not considered human anymore. This is a fact.

I wrote about Alison Hymes at this post. Nothing is being done and she continues to suffer the most heinous treatment in the Western State Hospital, Virginia.
Alison has already had her condition worsened due to the treatment the Virginia's hospital is giving her in a very deep degree. They keep on treating her like an animal.
Being tortured by physicians in a hospital; receiving a treatment that is causing more harm...*
This is surreal but we are living in the most dark of all humankind ages. History will tell the story.
Alison Hymes? Until when?

*Iatrogenesis is the leading cause of death in US.

Update:
I wrote to Virginia's governor Bob McDowell this message:

Dear Mr. McDowell,

I'm a Brazilian citizens and as a mental health advocate I would like to call to your attention what is happening to Alison Hymes at the From Western State Hospital.
This is the the report of one of her friends that is at Mindfreedom:

"Resident and longtime MindFreedom member Alison Hymes, on Wednesday, 7/3/13, had a re-commitment hearing. This hearing marked the 6 month, 1/2 year point, in her imprisonment at Western State Hospital in Staunton, Virginia.

The result of this hearing is that she was given another 45 days in the hospital after which she will be given another hearing. The result could have been worse as potentially she could have had to wait another 6 months for a hearing.

The bad news, according to Alison, is that the staff at the hospital are not talking about releasing her. She wishes to return to her condominium, her community, and the life she was living before imprisonment at Western State Hospital.

Talking to her over the phone it is not always easy to understand what she is saying. Her words are slurred and garbled. She claims that this is so because the hospital staff won't return  her dentures to her. Dentures they took from her.

In a previous alert we claimed she was taking lamictal rather than a neuroleptic. Following a previous hearing with her treatment team this is no longer true. Apparently her doctor thought it necessary to put her back on the drug prolixin. She is receiving shots of prolixin, a long acting injectable, every two weeks. She is also still receiving a daily dose of anti-convulsion drug lamictal.

She had gained much weight since being put on seroquel, the atypical neuroleptic she was receiving during her last hospitalization, and she is very sensitive, as you can well imagine anybody would be, about this issue. She doesn't like the effects of the prolixin, she understands it is a harmful substance, with a potential for doing her a great deal of damage, and she wishes to be taken off it.

Alison was the recipient of a kidney following lithium poisoning after a previous incident of psychiatric malpractice. Her friends and allies worry that keeping her at Western State Hospital
for any length of time will only further endanger her health. She says the medical staff at Western say she needs an operation, on an ulcer, but that the hospital is slow to get around to operating.

Asked what she would tell other members of MindFreedom she said, "I need to get out as soon as possible. I need to get out.""

The treatment Alison Hymes is receiving is criminal.
I hope Alison can count on your mercy to stop being tortured this way.

Sincerely yours,
Ana Luiza Lima

Let's hope for the better.


Wednesday, July 24

Alison Hymes: receiving life-threatening treatment in Western State Hospital, Virginia




It is outrageous that in America patients are imprisoned in mental institutions involuntary and are being treated in the most inhuman way with the help of court-orders.

She has been receiving treatments that are considered crimes against humanity since they only make the patients get worse and with more health problems than after the incarceration.
It was in the state of Virginia in 1914 that the first Eugenetics Sterilization Law passed (you could swear it was in German, couldn't you?)
'Advocacy in favor of sterilization was one of Harry Laughlin’s first major projects at the Eugenics Record Office. In 1914, he published a Model Eugenical Sterilization Law that proposed to authorize sterilization of the "socially inadequate" – people supported in institutions or "maintained wholly or in part by public expense. The law encompassed the "feeble minded, insane, criminalistic, epileptic, inebriate, diseased, blind, deaf; deformed; and dependent" – including "orphans, ne'er-do-wells, tramps, the homeless and paupers." By the time the Model Law was published in 1914, twelve states had enacted sterilization laws.
(continue reading)'
Is it the way this American state treat their citizens? It seems that not much has changed and the "insane" are still seen as evil that deserves the most hideous torture. What the state of Virginia is doing to Alison Hymes in criminal. Someone decided she had signs of "dementia" and there she is. As mental conditions are very subjective anyone can be treated like Alison Hymes is being treated. Remember the David Rosenhan experiment: "Being sane on Insane Places".

Once in a mental institution the person is depersonalized and dehumanized.  This is a fact all over the world.
Please, help Alison Hymes, a woman and a human being, that is living under life-threatening circumstances doing the follow:

ACTION ALERT to Free Alison Hymes!
Free Alison Hymes From Western State Hospital... We were asked to post the following updated alert for Alison by her friend, Frank. Please address any questions you may have directly to Frank at: nfla@mindfreedom.org.

 ACTION ALERT to Free Alison Hymes!

Resident and longtime MindFreedom member Alison Hymes, on Wednesday, 7/3/13, had a re-commitment hearing. This hearing marked the 6 month, 1/2 year point, in her imprisonment at Western State Hospital in Staunton, Virginia.

The result of this hearing is that she was given another 45 days in the hospital after which she will be given another hearing. The result could have been worse as potentially she could have had to wait another 6 months for a hearing.

The bad news, according to Alison, is that the staff at the hospital are not talking about releasing her. She wishes to return to her condominium, her community, and the life she was living before imprisonment at Western State Hospital.

Talking to her over the phone it is not always easy to understand what she is saying. Her words are slurred and garbled. She claims that this is so because the hospital staff won't return  her dentures to her. Dentures they took from her.

In a previous alert we claimed she was taking lamictal rather than a neuroleptic. Following a previous hearing with her treatment team this is no longer true. Apparently her doctor thought it necessary to put her back on the drug prolixin. She is receiving shots of prolixin, a long acting injectable, every two weeks. She is also still receiving a daily dose of anti-convulsion drug lamictal.

She had gained much weight since being put on seroquel, the atypical neuroleptic she was receiving during her last hospitalization, and she is very sensitive, as you can well imagine anybody would be, about this issue. She doesn't like the effects of the prolixin, she understands it is a harmful substance, with a potential for doing her a great deal of damage, and she wishes to be taken off it.

Alison was the recipient of a kidney following lithium poisoning after a previous incident of psychiatric malpractice. Her friends and allies worry that keeping her at Western State Hospital
for any length of time will only further endanger her health. She says the medical staff at Western say she needs an operation, on an ulcer, but that the hospital is slow to get around to operating.

Asked what she would tell other members of MindFreedom she said, "I need to get out as soon as possible. I need to get out."

Direct Actions

Please, contact the following state officials, and urge them to free Alison Hymes from her confinement and maltreatment at Western State Hospital.

James M. Martinez
Director, Office of Mental Health
VirginiaDepartment
of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services
(804) 371-0091
Jim.Martinez@dbhds.virginia.gov

Senator Tim Kaine
(202) 224-4024
http://www.kaine.senate.gov/contact

Senator Mark R. Warner
(202) 224-2023
http://www.warner.senate.gov/public//index.cfm?p=ContactPage

Delegate David Toscano
(434) 220-1660
DelDToscano@house.virginia.gov

Delegate Rob Bell
(434) 975-0902
DelRBell@house.virginia.gov

Sample message. (In your own words.)

I am writing (or calling) to complain about the forced drugging and false imprisonment of Charlottesville resident Alison Hymes at Western State Hospital in Staunton, Virginia. She is a danger to no one. She has been detained at the hospital for over 6 months now, and her continued detention serves no purpose. She is also being given periodic injections of prolixin, a powerful  neuroleptic drug, that is affecting her health in negative ways. Please, stop the abuse, release her from her confinement to Western State Hospital, and allow her to return home to her community, her life, and her friends.


Friday, May 17

Leonard Roy Frank: vegan, avid reader, religious, nonviolent resistance believer; therefore, schizophrenic paranoid




Leonard Roy Frank was sentenced to mental institutions because he wanted to be a better person.
As it happens to many after reading people like Gandhi, Jung, Thoreau, Arnold Toynbee, Emerson, and  other authors  changes the understanding of the world and of the self.

It happened to me and I was also seen  as a kind of threat especially because I didn't have money. I loved art, literature, cultural events, theater... and my most of my friends liked the same. Under dictatorship we were seen as "commies" and psychiatry helped putting in mental institutions some of those who were fighting the system.

 I see many youngsters trying to find themselves by reading and being connected to a group of people who are searching for another kind of life other than waking up in the morning, going to work and coming back home to have supper, watch TV and going to sleep, getting married, children... and repeating the same till death.

 He changed and his family thought that his behavior was a sign of a mental illness.

After going to psychiatrists he was labelled and treated - electroshocks, insulin coma - as a mentally ill.
This is his story and you can also watch  this video where he explains what was his "disease".
Reading, liking poetry. questioning and being sympathetic of nonviolent resistance are symptoms of mental illness, don't you agree? And, of course, having a beard and being vegetarian are also indicators of a severe mental condition.
Unfortunately Leonard's incarceration and tortures are still happening. We all know how physicians helped the nazy regime.

Metomorphosis, Interrupted

Leonard Roy Frank gets waylaid on the path to self-discovery

A revolution took place in Cuba, the Cold War was in full throttle, the Eisenhower era was drawing to a close, and I moved to San Francisco where I would soon find myself in a hellish world of imprisonment and torture. It was 1959.

Born in Brooklyn 27 years earlier, I had graduated from the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. After a two-year hitch in the Army, I managed and sold real estate in New York City and southern Florida for several years. Despite a poor record, I continued working in real estate in San Francisco.

A few months into my new job, things began to change for me, more internally, at least at first, than externally. Like so many of my generation, I was highly conventional in thought and lifestyle, and my goal in life was material success—I was a Fifties Yuppie. But I began to discover a new world within myself, and the mundane world, seemed, comparatively speaking, drab and unfulfilling. I lost interest in my job and, not surprisingly, soon lost the job itself. Thereafter, I spent long hours reading and reflecting. (emphasis added)

The book that influenced me most at that time was An Autobiography: The Story of My Experiments with Truth by Mohandas K. Gandhi. I adopted for myself his principles of nonviolent resistance, his interest in religion, and his practice of vegetarianism. In that book and other of his writings, Gandhi referred to the works that had helped shape his life. I was soon reading the Bhagavad Gita, the New Testament, Henry David Thoreau's “Essay on Civil Disobedience,” Leo Tolstoy's The Kingdom of God Is Within You, and the essays of Ralph Waldo Emerson. In keeping with the subtitle of Gandhi's autobiography, I started my own experimenting. This led to a complete reevaluation of my previously held values. Towards this end I broadened my reading to include, among many others, the Old Testament, Lao-tzu (Way of Life), William James (Varieties of Religious Experience), Henri Bergson (Two Sources of Religion and Morality), Joseph Campbell (Hero with a Thousand Faces), and the writings of Abraham Lincoln, Carl Jung, Arnold Toynbee, and Abraham Heschel.

During this exciting, wonder-filled time, the learning I acquired advanced my self-awareness and my understanding of the world. During this period, however, my parents visited me several times and became concerned with the changes they perceived in me. That I was living on my meager savings and was not “gainfully employed” upset them. My newfound spiritually centered beliefs and vegetarian practices challenged them in ways they couldn't handle. We were at loggerheads: if one side was right, the other had to be wrong; neither side was willing to compromise. (emphasis added)

The situation seemed to call for a parting of the ways, at least for a time. But my parents weren't willing to back off. They attributed the rift between us to my having a mental disorder. The changes I regarded as positive they regarded as symptomatic of “mental illness.” They urged me to consult a psychiatrist. I had done some reading in psychology but, while finding a number of valuable ideas, had rejected its overall approach as being too narrow. Psychotherapy was not for me. (emphasis added)

Over a period of more than two years, the struggle between my parents and me intensified. Eventually, because I wouldn't see a psychiatrist, my parents decided to force the psychiatrists on me. The way that was and still is being done in our society is by commitment, a euphemism for psychiatric incarceration. I was locked up at Mt. Zion Hospital in San Francisco on October 17, 1962.

While the world’s attention was focused on the Cuban Missile Crisis and the possibility of nuclear war, two physicians in a San Francisco hospital were focused on me and the possibility of my being mentally ill. They decided I was and gave me what they called a tentative diagnosis of schizophrenic reaction. The case history section of the Certificate of Medical Examiners they signed reads in full as follows: “Reportedly has been showing progressive personality changes over past 2 or 3 years. Grew withdrawn and asocial, couldn't or wouldn't work. Grew a beard, ate only vegetarian food and lived life of a beatnik—to a certain extent.” (emphasis added)

On October 20 I was sent to Napa State Hospital and from there, on December 15, to Twin Pines Hospital in a suburb south of San Francisco, where I remained through the first week of June 1963. Early on, I was diagnosed as a “paranoid schizophrenic,” a label reserved not only for serial killers but for almost anyone else in a mental institution who refuses to knuckle under to psychiatric authority. Scattered through my medical records, 143 pages of which I obtained in 1974, were the “symptoms” and observations which, according to psychiatric ideology, supported the diagnosis. These included, and I quote, condescending superior smile; vegetarian food idiosyncrasies; apathetic, flat affect; has a big black bushy beard and needs a haircut, he is very sloppy in appearance because of his beard; refuses to shave or to accept inoculations or medication; patient declined to comment on whether or not he thought he was a mentally ill person; no insight; impaired judgment; stilted, brief replies, often declines to answer, or comment; autistic; suspicious; delusions of superiority; paranoid delusions; bizarre behavior; seclusive; withdrawn, evasive and uncooperative and delusional; negativism; passively resistive; piercing eyes and religious preoccupations. (emphasis added)

Soon after being imprisoned, psychiatrists tried to gain my consent to shock treatment—at first electroconvulsive treatment (ECT) but after I was transferred to Twin Pines, “combined insulin coma-convulsive treatment.” When I was “extremely resistive” to undergoing the latter procedure, the hospital filed for a court order authorizing force in administering the procedure. At the end of the seven-paragraph letter to the court, the treating psychiatrist wrote, “In my professional opinion, this man is suffering from a Schizophrenic Reaction, Paranoid Type, Chronic, Severe, but it is felt he should have the benefit of an adequate course of treatment to see if this illness can be helped. In view of the extremes to which the patient carries his beliefs it is felt that the need of hospitalization and treatment under court order is a necessity as he is dangerous to himself and others under these circumstances.”

On January 10, 1963, after a hearing at which I was present, the Superior Court of California in San Mateo County “ordered [me] committed to Twin Pines Hospital.” The next day, the series began; there were in all 50 insulin coma treatments (ICT) and 35 electroconvulsive treatments (ECT).

Combined insulin coma-convulsive treatment was routinely administered to “schizophrenics” in the U.S. from the late 1930s through the mid-1960s. ECT was sometimes applied while the subject was in the coma phase of the ICT; sometimes the procedures were administered on separate days. Individual insulin sessions lasted from four to five hours. Large doses of injected insulin reduced the blood's sugar content triggering a physiological crisis manifested in the subject by blood pressure, breathing, heart, pulse, and temperature irregularities; flushing and pallor; incontinence and vomiting; moans and screams (referred to in the professional literature as “noisy excitement”); hunger (“hunger excitement”); sobbing, salivation, and sweating; restlessness; shaking and spasms, and sometimes convulsions. (emphasis added)

The crisis intensified as the subject, after several hours, went into a coma. Brain-cell destruction occurred when the blood was unable to provide the sugar essential to the brain's survival; the sugar-starved brain then began feeding on itself for nourishment. The hour-long coma phase of the procedure ended with the administration of carbohydrates (glucose and sugar) by mouth, injection or stomach tube.
If the subject could not be restored to consciousness by this method, he or she went into what was called “prolonged coma,” which resulted in even more severe brain damage and sometimes death. According to the United States Public Health Service Shock Therapy Survey (October 1941), 122 state hospitals reported an insulin coma treatment mortality rate of 4.9 percent—121 deaths among 2,457 cases.1

After gaining my freedom, I tried to find out how psychiatrists justified their use of ICT. One of the clearest statements I uncovered came from Manfred Sakel, the Austrian psychiatrist who introduced the insulin method in 1933 and, after arriving in the United States a few years later, became its most active promoter. He “claimed to be a direct descendent of the twelfth-century rabbi, physician, and philosopher Moses Maimonides.”2

In a popular book on the state of psychiatry published in 1942, Dr. Sakel was quoted as follows: “With chronic schizophrenics, as with confirmed criminals, we can’t hope for reform. Here the faulty pattern of functioning is irrevocably entrenched. Hence we must use more drastic measures to silence the dysfunctioning [brain] cells and so liberate the activity of the normal cells. This time we must kill the too vocal dysfunctioning cells. But can we do this without killing normal cells also? Can we select the cells we wish to destroy? I think we can.” (italics in original).3

I didn't see it that way. Combined insulin coma-convulsive treatment was an attempt to break my will, to force me back to an earlier phase of my spiritual and intellectual development. It was also the most devastating, painful and humiliating experience of my life.

Afterwards, I felt that every part of me was less than it had been. Except for memory traces—some titles of the many books I had read, for example— my memory for the three preceding years was gone. The wipe-out in my mind was like a path cut by an eraser across a heavily chalked blackboard. I did not know that John F. Kennedy was president although he had been elected two and a half years earlier. There were also big chunks of memory loss for experiences and events spanning my entire life; my high school and college education was effectively destroyed. I came to believe that shock treatment was a brainwashing method.

Some years later, I found corroboration for this opinion in a professional journal describing ECT's effect on patients by two psychiatrist-proponents of the procedure: “Their minds are like clean slates upon which we can write.”4

Aside from being a flat-out atrocity, the use of combined insulin coma-convulsive treatment necessarily involved the violation of certain human rights; some are proclaimed in the Bill of Rights, all are cherished in a free society.

1. Freedom from cruel and unusual punishment (Eighth Amendment). If insulin coma treatment is not a torture, nothing is. Readers of the professional literature, however, receive barely a hint of this reality. The barbaric aspects of the procedure, if mentioned at all, are glossed over in understatement and euphemism; for example, one psychiatrist cautioned against allowing new insulin patients to see other patients further along in their treatment, thus saving them “the trauma of sudden introduction to the sight of patients in different stages of coma—a sight which is not very pleasant to an unaccustomed eye.”5

I recall the horror of coming out of the last coma: severe hunger pains, perspiration, overwhelming fear and disorientation, alternating phases of unconsciousness and consciousness, strangers hovering over my strapped-down body (none of whom I recognized although I had been thrown in with them months before), being punctured with needles, drinking heavily-sugared orange juice ravenously, and later being held up by one or two attendants in a shower where the filth was washed away. Brain damage caused by the treatments destroyed my memory of what the previous sessions had been like.

However, I remember what happened a week or two after completing my series when, having returned for lunch from “occupational therapy,” I was sitting in the day room which was separated from the insulin-treatment area by a thick metal door. Suddenly I heard an indescribable, other-worldly scream. The metal door had been left slightly ajar and one of the new patients, a young musician, was undergoing insulin coma down the corridor on the other side of that door, and he was expressing his pain. Almost immediately an attendant shut the door tight, but the scream, now muffled, lingered on for another few seconds. I don't recall any of my own screams; I will never forget his.

2. Freedom of thought (implicit in the First Amendment). The words of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr., ring as true today as when he first wrote them in 1860: “The very aim and end of our institutions is just this: that we may think what we like and say what we think.”6 The brain-damaging force of insulin coma is second only to the lobotomy operation; it impedes the ability to think, to create, and to generate ideas. Every ICT survivor experiences impaired thinking and knows what it means to lose memories, words (you have the idea but can't call to mind the word to fit it) and trains of thought not just once in a while, but repeatedly hour after hour, day after day. I have keenly felt these losses.

3. Freedom of religion (First Amendment). As noted above, the phrase “religious preoccupations” was among the symptoms recorded in my psychiatric records. One of these preoccupations concerned my beard, which the staff at both Napa State and Twin Pines Hospitals had been urging me, without success, to remove. In the midst of the series—after I had undergone 14 insulin comas and 17 electroshocks—the treating psychiatrist wrote my father, “In the last week Leonard was seen by the local rabbi, Rabbi Rosen, who spent a considerable period of time with him discussing the removal of his beard. I felt it was desirable to have the rabbi go over it with him, as Leonard seems to attach a great deal of religious significance to the beard. The rabbi was unable to change Leonard's thinking in this matter.”

At this point, the San Francisco psychiatrist who had been advising my father was brought in to interview me. After noting in the Report of Consultant that I was “essentially as paranoid as ever,” he recommended that “during one of the comas his beard should be removed as a therapeutic device to provoke anxiety and make some change in his body image. Consultation should be obtained from the TP attorney as to the civil rights issues—but I doubt that these are crucial. The therapeutic effort is worth it—inasmuch that he can always grow another.” On March 11, the Doctor's Orders, signed “REJ,” read: “Pts beard to be shaved off & to be given hair cut — observe very carefully today & tonite for any unpredictable behavior re suicidal or elopement [escape].” The same psychiatrist wrote my father ten days later, “Leonard's beard was removed this last week which caused him no great amount of distress....” The shock therapy in combination with the beard-shaving therapy “worked.” I was soon shaving on my own. I have no direct memory of the struggle over my beard or of even having had a beard during this period.

4. Right to be let alone. In a 1928 Supreme Court decision, Olmstead v. United States, Associate Justice Louis D. Brandeis wrote, “The makers of our Constitution... conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone—the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.” Without having been proved guilty of violating anyone else's rights, I had been deprived of my freedom and made to undergo corporal punishment disguised as medical treatment. In the truest sense of the term, I was minding my own business, exercising my right to be let alone. I thought that in the United States this right was protected; I was wrong. That was 40 years ago, but it's still happening as literally millions of innocent people every year are being locked up, for short and long periods of time, in psychiatric facilities where their rights are trampled on and they are subjected to psychiatric treatment against their will or without their fully informed consent.

Aside from the serious and permanent memory loss, other effects of those nearly eight months of confinement and forced treatment include a general slowing of my thought processes and a loss of drive and stamina. But by psychiatric standards, I am still “essentially as paranoid as ever.” I still have my “vegetarian food idiosyncracies.” I have regrown my “big black [now graying] bushy beard.” And, what is more, I have maintained all my “religious preoccupations.”
Notes

1. Franklin G. Ebaugh, “A Review of the Drastic Shock Therapies in the Treatment of the Psychoses,” Annals of Internal Medicine, March 1943, p. 294.
2. Alex Beam, Gracefully Insane: The Rise and Fall of America's Premier Mental Hospital (New York: Public Affairs, 2001), p. 78.
3. Marie Beynon Ray, Doctors of the Mind: The Story of Psychiatry (Boston: Little, Brown, 1942), p. 250.
4. Cyril J.C. Kennedy and David Anchel, “Regressive Electric-Shock in Schizophrenics Refractory to Other Shock Therapies,” Psychiatric Quarterly, vol. 22, 1948, p. 318.
5. Alexander Gralnick, “Psychotherapeutic and Interpersonal Aspects of Insulin Treatment,” Psychiatric Quarterly, vol. 18, 1944, p. 187.
6. Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr., The Professor at the Breakfast Table (New York: E.P. Dutton, 1931 [1860]), ch. 5.

Biographical Note

After being released from Twin Pines Hospital in 1963, Leonard Roy Frank spent the next six years in study, reeducating himself.

Since the early 1970s he has been active in the psychiatric survivors movement, first as a staff member of Madness Network News (1972) and then as the co-founder of the Network Against Psychiatric Assault (1974)—both dedicated to ending abuses in the psychiatric system.

He is the editor of The History of Shock Treatment (1978) and several books of quotations: Influencing Minds: A Reader in Quotations (1995), Random House Webster's Quotationary (1998), Random House Webster's Wit & Humor Quotationary (2000), and Freedom: Quotes and Passages from the World's Greatest Freethinkers (2003). [See that one in our Attitude Catalog, p. 45. — ed.

Last month, Random House released five more of his books: Inspiration, Love, Money, Wisdom, and Wit, each with the subtitle The Greatest Things Ever Said.

He has resided in San Francisco since 1959 and may be reached at lfrank@igc.org.


Thursday, February 7

February, 7 Cymbalta's victim Traci Johnson death anniversary


She would be twenty eight years old if she had not volunteered to join Cymbalta's Eli-Lilly urinary incontinence clinical trial in early January, 2004 in a clinic at Indiana University Medical Center.

In February, 7 her body was found. She hung herself with a scarf from a shower rod at Eli-Lily's facilities.

She was a healthy woman who just joined the trial to make a little money.

R.I.P. Traci








First published in justAna.

Sunday, December 30

Antidepressants: "more lives taken than saved" claims Dr. David Healy










"Isoniazid, reserpine, imipramine, atropine, stimulants, benzodiazepines, antipsychotics, fluoxetine*, ketamine – all have antidepressant credentials. The word coined by Max Lurie has lost meaning; it’s a basket for acronyms. Psychiatry was the first branch of medicine to have specialist hospitals and journals, the first to adopt controlled trials, rating scales, and guidelines. The antidepressants beckoned us toward clinical neuroscience but have led to myth, hidden data, ghostwriting, more lives taken than saved, womb to tomb consumption, and an increased incidence of “depression” from 1 per 1,000 to 1 in 5 of us.
Knowing when not to prescribe is the greatest art in medicine."

Dr. David Healy (here)

*Fluoxetine= Prozac 

Wednesday, September 5

Fake brand handbags shows women's character: Integrity in science?





"One of the more fascinating revelations is that women who carry fake Louis Vuitton or Tory Burch handbags or wear fake Cartier jewelry, are more likely to lie, cheat or steal than other women."

This is a research done by Dr. Dan Ariely, a Professor of Behavioral Economics at Duke University, has discovered and FOX news published an article about this revelation.

This will go for the 100% fake Hella Heaven seal.
This absurd hypotheses  is another of many absurdities from academic "researchers" of many specialties.
Dr. Dan Ariely should not be praised for such nonsense. He should be put on trial by his peers but chances are that his peers will soon be peer-reviewing it to accept it as theory.
Integrity in science? Where?
It seems that only those who are not receiving money from any institution or even who are far from institutions are capable of real research.

The consequences of researches like this are very serious. Still, nothing is done.

Update:
Just got this comment from Mark:


Blogger Mark p.s.2 said...
Do they also have more fake orgasm's during sex?
September 7, 2012 12:09 PM

Lol...
I'm sure they will never approach this topic because they would have to deal with the fact that their women
fake.
You know those couple that have a tacit pact? She fakes he pretends he doesn't know and she pretends that she doesn't know he knows.
Till death apart...
Taboo topic. I love them. I'll do a post about faking orgasm. Just wait.

Monday, August 20

"All We Have to Fear" another book about Psychiatry's criminal practice




There are already so many books exposing the absurd way that psychiatry is being done that it's amazing that some people have not a clue about it all. Maybe people don't have the habit of going to bookstores or if they do they go straight to the best-sellers shelves.

The LA Review of Books has published this article about "All we Have to Fear: Psychiatry's Transformation of Natural Anxieties into Mental Disorders" by Allan V. Horwitz  PhD and Jerome Wakefield PhD:

 Psychiatry’s legitimacy crisis
By Andrew Scull, LA Review of Books~

ABOUT 40 YEARS AGO, American psychiatry faced an escalating crisis of legitimacy. All sorts of evidence suggested that, when confronted with a particular patient, psychiatrists could not reliably agree as to what, if anything, was wrong. To be sure, the diagnostic process in all areas of medicine is far more murky and prone to error than we like to think, but in psychiatry the situation was — and indeed still is — a great deal more fraught, and the murkiness more visible. It didn’t help that psychiatry’s most prominent members purported to treat illness with talk therapy and stressed the central importance of early childhood sexuality for adult psychopathology. In this already less-than-tidy context, the basic uncertainty regarding how to diagnose what was wrong with a patient was potentially explosively destabilizing.

The modern psychopharmacological revolution began in 1954 with the introduction of Thorazine, hailed as the first “anti-psychotic.” It was followed in short order by so-called “minor tranquilizers:” Miltown, and then drugs like Valium and Librium. The Rolling Stones famously sang of “mother’s little helper,” which enabled the bored housewife to get through to her “busy dying day.” Mother’s helper had a huge potential market. Drug companies, however, were faced with a problem. As each company sought its own magic potion, it encountered a roadblock of sorts: its psychiatric consultants were unable to deliver homogeneous populations of test subjects suffering from the same diagnosed illness in the same way. Without breaking the amorphous catchall of “mental disturbance” into defensible sub-sets, the drug companies could not develop the data they needed to acquire licenses to market the new drugs.

In a Cold War context, much was being made about the way the Soviets were stretching the boundaries of mental illness to label dissidents as mad in order to incarcerate and forcibly medicate them. But Western critics also began to look askance at their own shrinks and to allege that the psychiatric emperor had no clothes. A renegade psychiatrist called Thomas Szasz published a best-selling broadside called The Myth of Mental Illness, suggesting that psychiatrists were pernicious agents of social control who locked up inconvenient people on behalf of a society anxious to be rid of them, invoking an illness label that had the same ontological status as the label “witch” employed some centuries before. Illness, he truculently insisted, was a purely biological thing, a demonstrable part of the natural world. Mental illness was a misplaced metaphor, a socially constructed way of permitting an ever-wider selection of behaviors to be forcibly controlled under the guise of helping people.

The problem was exacerbated when some psychiatrists sought to examine the diagnostic process. Their findings dramatically reinforced the growing suspicion that their profession’s claims to expertise were spurious. Prominent figures like Aaron Beck, Robert Spitzer, MG. Sandifer and Benjamin Pasamanick published systematic data that dramatized just how tenuous agreement was among psychiatrists, even the most prominent ones, regarding the nature of psychiatric pathology; consensus barely exceeded 50 percent whether the subjects were patients in state hospitals or out-patient settings. And in 1972, a systematic study of diagnostic practices in Britain and the United States found massive differences: New York psychiatrists diagnosed nearly 62 percent of their patients as schizophrenic, while in London only 34 percent received this diagnosis. And, while less than five percent of the New York patients were diagnosed with depressive psychoses, the comparable figure in London was 24 percent. Further examination of the patients suggested that these differences were byproducts of the preferences and prejudices of each group of psychiatrists, and yet they resulted in consequential differences in treatment.

Nor was this chaotic situation hidden from a larger public. In the legal profession, the civil rights movement of the 1960s led to the emergence of public interest law. A number of these attorneys broadened their focus from race to include other stigmatized and disadvantaged populations. By the early seventies, this led to the creation of a mental health bar, two of whose prominent practitioners seized on the results reported in these studies. They intimated that psychiatrists should no longer be credited with the status of “expert witnesses,” since their judgments amounted to “flipping coins in the courtroom,” as they put it. Shortly thereafter, a cleverly designed study by a Stanford social psychologist, David Rosenhan, appearing in the august pages of Science, poured gasoline on the flames. Rosenhan had eight pseudo-patients (including himself) show up at a dozen psychiatric hospitals complaining they were hearing voices and uttering the words “empty,” “hollow,” or “thud.” The so-called patients otherwise presented their normal selves. Seven received the diagnosis of schizophrenia, the eighth was labeled manic-depressive, and all were hospitalized for terms as long as 52 days. The article garnered massive media coverage, made Rosenhan a star and made of psychiatry a hapless buffoon.

To address the embarrassment, one of the profession’s internal critics, Robert Spitzer of Columbia University, persuaded the American Psychiatric Association to authorize the development of a new diagnostic manual. The document he and his Task Force produced, approved and published in slightly modified form in 1980 as the third edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM III for short) launched a revolution in American psychiatry whose effects are still felt today. Versions III R (revised), IV, and IV TR (text revision) and DSM 5 (to be released in 2013) have been produced with numbing regularity. The advent of DSM III and its descendants constitute the backdrop to the argument presented in the new book by Allan Horwitz and Jerome Wakefield, All We Have to Fear: Psychiatry’s Transformation of Natural Anxieties into Mental Disorders.        

Horwitz and Wakefield want to argue for the harmful impact of what is often called the neo-Kraepelinian revolution in psychiatry. Emil Kraepelin was the fin-de-siècle German psychiatrist who launched the fashion for descriptive psychopathology and first made the distinction between dementia praecox and manic-depressive illness. Horwitz and Wakefield suggest that the efforts of Kraepelin’s late-twentieth century successors to make psychiatric diagnoses more rigorous and predictable have instead enabled psychiatric pathology to get out of hand. They identify two problems: the psychiatric profession’s obsession with simplistic, symptom-based diagnoses, and the looseness of its criteria for defining mental states as pathology. All sorts of anxieties that are in reality part of the normal range of human emotion and experience have been transformed by professional sleight of hand into diseases. The upshot, they contend, is that whereas thirty years ago less than five percent of Americans were thought to suffer from an anxiety disorder, nowadays some widely cited epidemiological studies have decreed that as many as 50 percent of us do so.

Horwitz and Wakefield are scarcely the first scholars to suggest that rising rates of mental illness are a reflection of the widening and loosening of diagnostic schema. Three decades ago, the British psychiatrist Edward Hare and I engaged in a vigorous debate on this issue in the pages of the British Journal of Psychiatry. He argued that the growing number of lunatics in Victorian museums of madness were victims of a new viral disease, schizophrenia, and I countered that it was more probable that other factors were at work — namely, the amorphousness of nineteenth century definitions of madness, the decreasing willingness and ability of families to cope with difficult or impossible relations, and the eagerness of psychiatrists to enlarge their sphere of operations. Of more contemporary relevance, a range of commentators have noticed the explosive growth of depression as a diagnosis, to the point where it is now frequently termed ‘the common cold’ of psychiatry; the equally dramatic expansion in the number of children being diagnosed with ADHD; the appearance out of nowhere of juvenile bipolar disorder, which apparently became forty times as common between 1994 and 2004; the epidemic of autism, a formerly rare condition afflicting less than one in five hundred children in 1990, which has now mushroomed into a disease found in one in every ninety children. More than a few scholars have been tempted to attribute these seismic shifts not to any real alteration in the numbers of sufferers from these disorders, but to disease-mongering by the psychiatric profession and by Big Pharma, the multi-national pharmaceutical industry that obtains a huge fraction of its profits from the sale of drugs aimed at mental disorders of all sorts.

Among the most zealous critics of the expanding psychiatric empire have been two unlikely souls: Robert Spitzer, the principal architect of DSM III, and Allen Frances, who played a similarly large role in the construction of DSM IV. As the latest edition of that tome, the largest thus far and the most delayed, struggles to be born, those assembling it have been assaulted by Spitzer and Frances for creating a version built on hasty and unscientific foundations; they claim it pathologizes everyday features of normal human existence, and that, like its predecessors, it will create new epidemics of spurious psychiatric illness. Allen Frances, in particular, has taken to uttering frequent mea culpas, taking the blame for loosening the criteria for diagnosing autism in DSM IV, and thus, so he claims, sowing fear and mislabeling thousands and thousands of children.

Before focusing on Horwitz and Wakefield’s contribution to this debate, it is worth acknowledging that Spitzer and Frances’s claims have proven to be highly controversial. Not unexpectedly, given the huge revenue the American Psychiatric Association rakes in from each edition of its manual, and the centrality of that book’s place to psychiatry’s claims to be a science, the oligarchs who run its operations have been swift to condemn the renegades. The oligarchs have launched a series of ad hominem attacks on the renegades’ motives and on the nature of their criticisms. Interestingly, equally fierce if not fiercer reactions have been manifested from an entirely different source: the relatives of those who have been diagnosed with ailments whose boundaries Spitzer and Frances want to shrink. Particularly vocal in online discussions have been the parents of children diagnosed with autism, for whom the loss of the label will mean being deprived of social services and support that is conditional on retaining that status. At times, the vituperation that has rained down on Frances’s head has been extraordinary — and indeed it’s hard not to form a mental image of families all across the country sticking pins into a Frances voodoo doll. Whatever other lessons are derived from this state of affairs, one point should be obvious: It is not just professional imperialism on the part of psychiatrists, nor the greedy machinations of Big Pharma, that explains the burgeoning problem of mental disorder in early twenty-first century America. And a burgeoning problem it is. To cite just one statistic[EM1] , one in every 76 Americans in 2007 qualified for welfare payments based on mental disability. As we examine Horwitz and Wakefield’s work on anxiety disorders, it is therefore important to bear in mind that theirs is just one piece of a larger puzzle. Indeed, the same authors have already examined another example of this phenomenon, the medicalization of sadness, and its transformation into pathology.

Horwitz and Wakefield rightly place the DSM in its various post-1980 incarnations at the center of their explanation of how we are to account for the massive growth in the numbers of people diagnosed with pathological anxiety. DSM III “solved” the legitimacy crisis that psychiatry faced in the late 1970s. As long as one employed its methods and categories, high levels of agreement among psychiatrists confronting the same case were all but assured. In that sense, psychiatric diagnosis became, as statisticians would put it, more reliable. How was that feat accomplished? By rendering the diagnostic process mechanical, employing a tick-the-boxes approach to deciding whether or not someone had a mental disorder, and if so, what disorder it was. Display any six out of ten symptoms, and voilà, a schizophrenic. Tick another set of boxes and you had General Anxiety Disorder (GAD), and so forth. A given patient might potentially have several “illnesses” at once, a problem alleviated by setting up a hierarchy of psychiatric diseases and awarding patients the most serious of them, or by creating a category called “co-morbidity” and thereby accepting the presence of multiple illnesses. The overlap in symptomatology between two schizophrenics with the “same” disease might be as few as two out of ten symptoms.

Why is psychiatry forced to rely on a grab bag of symptoms to make its diagnoses? Because, fundamentally, it has nothing else to offer. The cause of the overwhelming majority of psychiatric disorders remains as obscure as ever. Periodic weightless claims, endorsed by credulous science journalists, that schizophrenia is triggered by a newly discovered gene or by a dopamine deficiency in the brain, or that people suffering from depression have a shortage of serotonin, which can be reversed by taking a Selective Seratonin Reuptake Inhibitor (SSRI) such as Prozac to immerse their synapses in a serotonin bath, are so much biobabble ­­­— scientific nonsense that has proved good marketing copy for Big Pharma but is otherwise worthless.

This reliance on symptoms, and on the simplistic approach of counting symptoms to make a diagnosis, creates a bogus confidence in psychiatric science. Such categories have an element of the arbitrary about them. When Robert Spitzer and his associates created DSM III, they liked to call themselves DOPs (data-oriented persons). In fact, DSM’s categories were assembled through political horse-trading and internal votes and compromise. The document they produced paid little heed to the question of validity, or to whether the new system of categorizing mental disorders corresponded to real diseases out there. And subsequent revisions have hewed to the same approach. With the single exception of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), which, as its name implies, is a diagnosis having its origins in trauma of an extreme sort, the various categories in the DSM, including the anxiety disorders that preoccupy Horwitz and Wakefield, are purely symptom-based. (The construction of the PTSD diagnosis, incidentally, as the authors show, was every bit as political as the creation of the other DSM categories.) Because so much depends on the wording that describes the symptoms to be looked for and on how many symptoms one needs to display to warrant a particular diagnosis (why do six symptoms make a schizophrenic, not five, or seven?), small shifts in terminology can have huge real-world effects. The problem is magnified in studies of the epidemiology of psychiatric disorders. As Horwitz and Wakefield point out, to make studies of this sort cheaper and allow those producing them to employ laypeople to administer the necessary instruments, the diagnostic process is simplified even further in these settings. They write that psychiatric epidemiologists make “no attempt to establish the context in which worries arise, endure, and disappear so as to separate contextually appropriate anxiety from disordered anxiety conditions [and thus they] can uncover as much seeming psycho-pathology as they desire.”

By contrast, at least initially, psychiatrists were expected to exercise some independent clinical judgment when reaching their professional judgments. Being anxious and fearful is, under some circumstances, a natural and healthy human response to the world. How are we to distinguish between healthy or normal fears — perhaps even fears that are exaggerated but had their origins in an earlier period of our evolutionary history — and pathological forms of anxiety? Allow too much room for clinical judgment and the goal of standardizing psychiatric diagnosis goes away. Eliminate it and the anxieties that people naturally feel when they’ve survived a bad marriage, recovered from a serious disease, or lived through a war or a disaster like Katrina, are all-too-readily relabeled as illness. DSM attempted to cope with this problem by insisting that the anxiety had to be “excessive” and “prolonged,” six months in duration or longer, and to be perceived as “abnormal” or disabling by those subject to these emotions. These are inadequate and fallible correctives, but they did something to make it less likely that normal people would be called “mentally ill.” As the manual went through successive editions, however, and as its categories were simplified to make the job of epidemiologists easier and cheaper, the effect, as Horwitz and Wakefield argue, was steadily to enlarge the numbers of ordinary people drawn into the ranks of the mentally unstable, often to a spectacular degree. And because of the seemingly scientific basis of the labels, the consistency with which cases were diagnosed, and the translation of human judgment by means of this verbal alchemy into statistics, the multiplication of the anxious and nervous (as with other psychiatric categories) has proceeded in relentless fashion.

Through detailed analyses of the underlying terminological changes and their effects, Horwitz and Wakefield show how “social phobia” multiplied six-fold in the course of a decade. They document a similar pattern with PTSD, with Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD), and a whole variety of other anxiety disorders. Less satisfactorily, they make some attempt to link these developments to issues of professional imperialism, the financial interests of Big Pharma, and even the demands of patients and more especially of patients’ families, for whom a particular diagnosis may be the sine qua non of obtaining access to insurance payments and other forms of social support. Two other critics of the DSM, Kutchins and Kirk, have suggested that the looseness of its categories means that “the prevalence rates in the United States will rise and fall as erratically as the stock market.” To this comment, Horwitz and Wakefield add a rueful and all-too-accurate coda: “Kutchins and Kirk are only half correct. Prevalence rates in recent epidemiological studies go in only one direction: upward.”

All We Have to Fear is nonetheless a curate’s egg of a book. There are good bits and bad bits. Horwitz and Wakefield manage to make a strong case for the prosecution: Psychiatry has indeed lost its way and seems increasingly unable to resist pathologizing ordinary life. But before the reader gets to that case, he or she will have to plow through the seemingly endless and tedious pages of evolutionary psychology that make up the key sections of the book’s first three chapters. Here one finds claims about genetic endowments that were built into human beings at the time of cave-men and hunter-gathers, and persist as part of our mental constitution. These inheritances from the past are invoked to explain our contemporary fears and anxieties, even ones of quite specific sorts. The alleged features of normal human nature and the supposed hold our genes have over our behavior are as speculative as most neuro-maniacal accounts of modern man. More importantly, they are unnecessary, and get in the way of an argument that depends on no more than the self-evident proposition that all of us experience fears and anxieties, which are intensified in certain social situations and by large-scale trauma, but which cannot be termed “mental illnesses.”

Even setting that objection aside, the remainder of the book is heavy-going. Much of the discussion is wandering and repetitive. The same arguments are mobilized again and again, moving across only slightly varied terrain. What could have been a long article thus becomes a book of sorts — one that many readers will have trouble finishing. This is too bad, because contemporary psychiatry is on the brink of one of those periodic crises of legitimacy that have been so notable a feature of the profession’s history over the past couple of centuries; the story Horwitz and Wakefield recount helps us to understand one of the reasons why renewed turmoil threatens to engulf the psychiatric enterprise."

Source: first published at JustAna.