Friday, December 30, 2005
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
"Killian testified that Boner probably was suffering from withdrawal from Effexor, an antidepressant he had been taking."
Boner used 'sleeper hold' to kill his girlfriend
Robert W. "Wes" Boner III strangled Rebecca Dyer, 42, with both hands while the two were on the couch arguing.
Boner told police he was agitated at the time of the slaying on April 2, 2004, but did not know why. Springfield police detective Jim Graham said Boner told him Dyer appeared to be suffering on the floor after he choked her, so he used a "sleeper hold" to "put her out of her misery."
Graham said Boner identified himself as a martial arts instructor in a job application found in the Wedgwood Terrace mobile home at 3725 Peoria Road.
Circuit Judge Leo Zappa sentenced Boner to 40 years in prison for the first-degree murder to which he pleaded guilty in October.
Sangamon County public defender Brian Otwell argued for a 25-year sentence, citing Boner's history of mental illness. He presented testimony from Dr. Terry Killian of Springfield, who said Boner had been discharged from McFarland Mental Health Center two weeks before the slaying and that Boner told him he had run out of medication three or four days before he strangled Dyer.
Killian testified that Boner probably was suffering from withdrawal from Effexor, an antidepressant he had been taking.
Boner has been hospitalized 15 times since adolescence for mental-health problems that included diagnoses of bipolar disorder, major depression and schizoaffective disorder, Killian said. Boner also told Kilian he took non-prescription drugs, including marijuana and LSD.
Sangamon County State's Attorney John Schmidt and assistant state's attorney Richard Wray recommended a 48-year sentence.
Schmidt said Boner made conscious choices to choke Dyer, kill her and then take her car and credit cards and travel to southern Illinois to visit an ex-girlfriend and her children.
"He knew right from wrong," Schmidt said.
"He made a choice to treat her (Dyer) like an animal, then got in her car and fled to southern Illinois."
Boner offered no resistance when he was arrested in Jonesboro the evening of April 4, 2004.
Schmidt said Boner has a prior juvenile adjudication for aggravated assault and adult convictions for attempted armed robbery and robbery.
Boner was sent to prison in January 1998 for the Sept. 21, 1997, robbery of a convenience store in Willisville, about 30 miles northwest of Carbondale.
"I would argue strenuously that his record does not reflect a history of violence," Otwell said. "Our mental health system in this case failed Mr. Boner and failed all of us."
Killian said Boner told him he went to the Springfield Mental Health Center and asked for medication on the day Dyer died. Killian said Boner told him he was refused because he had missed his "linkage" appointment, but was told he could get the medication at either the emergency room or a free mental health clinic.
Schmidt said Boner did not seek it elsewhere.
Dyer's father, Jesse Dyer, said Boner had "disrupted our whole family" before breaking down on the witness stand and ending his testimony.
Dyer's sister, Tina Kuvalic, said she has been a surrogate mother and surrogate grandmother since her sister's death. She worries that Rebecca Dyer's grandchildren are too young to remember their grandmother. Kuvalic asked the judge to give Boner the maximum 60-year-sentence.
One of Boner's sisters, Melissa Handsbery, testified her brother was "a sensitive and caring person" growing up.
"He was not a violent person," she said.
Graham testified that, when detectives were taking pictures of Boner's face and hands, he told them he knew what they were looking for and that they would find no defensive wounds.
"He said he knew what he was doing," Graham testified. "He said, 'You've got to move in on them quick.'"
Chris Dettro can be reached at 788-1510 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Saturday, December 24, 2005
By Lynn Stuter
December 24, 2005
A spate of articles have appeared recently in newspapers across the country focusing on youth suicide. Included in the majority of those articles is mention of TeenScreen, a program emanating from Columbia University. TeenScreen brags, on their website, of their presence in all but a few of the fifty states (Alabama, Kansas, Maryland, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming).
Before going further, it seems prudent to examine the incidence of youth suicide over a several year period. We shall use the most up-to-date data, coming from the Centers for Disease Control, starting in the year 1981 and ending in 2002. This data is for all races, both sexes, with an age range of 0 to 19 years of age. The numbers represent deaths per 100,000 populace in the given age range.
Suicides in the given cohort are less now than they were in 1981, reaching their highest peak in 1988. So, pray tell, why is there a “crisis” now when there obviously wasn’t in the peak year of 1988?
We can find the answer in the cover letter of the Presidents New Freedom Commission on Mental Health (NFC). It is of interest to note, at this point, that Michael Hogan who headed the Presidents New Freedom Commission on Mental Health is also on the advisory council of TeenScreen. Are we to believe that Hogan’s position as head of the New Freedom Commission is not connected to the recognition TeenScreen received in the NFC report; and the benefit TeenScreen will obviously incur as a result of that recognition?
The cover letter to the NFC report, signed by Michael Hogan, states,
“You charged the Commission to study the mental health service delivery system, and to make recommendations that would enable adults with serious mental illnesses and children with serious emotional disturbance to live, work, learn, and participate fully in their communities. We have completed the task.”
The created crisis: children with serious emotional disturbance must be able to live, work, learn, and participate fully in their communities. Of course, while that sounds wonderful, the proof is in the pudding so to speak and what we have found, repeatedly, with the transformation of any system, is that the system is not about helping those caught in it, but rather, is about meeting its goals (exit outcomes). In this capacity, the people caught in the system become nothing more than fodder in a grist mill with accountability being to the system, not to the people.
Quite obviously, the crisis having been created, TeenScreen is there to save the day and certainly reap the profit. After claiming the TeenScreen program to be based on research, one newspaper, The St Louis Post-Dispatch, actually printed a retraction, stating,
“The TeenScreen program was developed by Columbia University in 1991. Its creator said it was based on studies of teens who had committed suicide. The program is not based on more recent research involving brain imaging, as was suggested in a report on the front page of Sunday's editions.” (posted December 13, 2005)
Too much of what is being passed off as research today, quoted liberally and incessantly and supported by so-called experts, meets the adage that a lie repeated often enough becomes truth.
As an example of present-day research, consider this: When the early childhood initiative came to Washington State, the research supposedly backing this initiative was never referred to by name but spoken of thusly, “We now know …” obviously to give it the air of authority.
But what did we know? How did we know it? Who did the research? Under what conditions and criteria did they do the research? Is the research valid and reliable? All pertinent questions that needed to be asked and answered.
Research, to be credible, reliable and valid, must follow certain criteria:
1. It must be conducted by an independent entity — one that is not connected by association, practice, or finances to the program being studied.
2. There must be an observable research design. That means:
a. That a control group (not in the studied program) and an experimental group (in the program) are used which are in every conceivable way identical except for the program being evaluated.
b. That the groups are sufficiently large to draw conclusions.
c. That the conditions under which the program is conducted are not biased toward either the control or experimental group (for example, both groups gets equal instructional time).
d. That the program be of adequate duration to fairly examine it.
e. And that the evaluation of the program results be conducted in an objective, neutral manner.
3. The results must be reproducible. Another research team, operating separately, must be able to obtain the same results using the same methodology.
4. The results cited must be directly traceable to the program being studied (for example, if a patient is given a new medicine and shows improvement, but continues to improve after the medicine is discontinued, then a researcher cannot conclude that the new medicine was the reason for the improvement of the patient).
5. Program results must be evaluated externally and objectively, not in a closed circle where the program is only tested against criteria it establishes. For example, tests are written to exactly match an OBE curriculum and no other testing instruments are allowed to judge the success of the new program. The program's claims of success must be observable through outside measurements.
I requested of the governor’s office the research to which he was continually referring as “We now know …” What I received was a stack of magazine articles. This was the “research” supporting the early childhood initiative. It was very obvious, in the absence of any valid and reliable research, that the early childhood initiative was not in the best interests of parents or children; that it was nothing more than a political agenda.
It is important, at this point, to digress for a moment. Ask yourself this — when has any social issue, in which the government became involved, ever been cured or resolved? Let’s see, since the Johnson Administration, back in the early 1960’s, we’ve had, for example, the War on Poverty. Then there’s been the War on Drugs since the 1980’s. Have either of these so-called “wars” been won? No. You have to ask yourself, with the billions (or is that trillions?) of taxpayer dollars that have been poured into these so-called “wars”, why not?
Maybe the better question would be, why would they? After all, if the problem is cured, the government doesn’t need that money and with the problem cured, the size of government would logically shrink. Does shrinking in size serve the interests of government? No, of course not. Government as an entity seeks power and position. It can only do that if it grows and can continually justify that growth and the need for further growth. Our Founding Fathers intended a limited form of government, the size of which to be curtailed by a people who wished to remain free. To this end, our United States Constitution gave to the congress very limited powers (Article I, Section 8) and many limitations (Article I, Section 9). To protect states’ rights, the Tenth Amendment was the last amendment of the Bill of Rights reserving to the people and states those powers not expressing delegated to the United States.
But the intent of the U.S. Constitution would only stand if people took an active role in maintaining the limited form of government. And that has not happened. The result has been a continually growing government that has developed a voracious appetite for power and position. To that end, the government will do that which serves its purposes, irrespective. And curing social problems is not in its best interests, especially when there is no accountability for the money spent and there hasn’t been. This is why the War on Poverty and the War on Drugs have never been won; why not one social problem in which the government has become involved has ever gotten better. Now we have the War on Terrorism and that one promises to cost more than all of the others combined and will never be won either.
Remember after Hurricane Katrina, and after the half-baked, totally bungled response by FEMA, President Bush going on record to say the federal government needed more authority to deal with disasters like this? That remark wasn’t about saving lives, property or anything else; that remark was about more money, more power, more growth in federal government. Taxpayer money is not being spent to cure problems, taxpayer money is being spent to subsidize problems because that is the only way government can justify bigger and more intrusive government.
What do we actually know today about brain function? What we actually know, as opposed to think, is that we do not know enough about how the brain functions to state definitives in this regard. That, people, is what we know. Considering the intricacies of the brain, it is questionable whether we will ever know.
When Governor Gary Locke stated, “We now know …” his statement fell into the realm of a lie repeated often enough becomes the truth. When I suggested to the Early Childhood Commission, established by the executive order of Governor Locke, that they bring Dr John Bruer, author of the Myth of the First Three Years to our state to address the commission, as they had brought Rob Reiner to the state, they declined. Why did they decline? What Dr Bruer would obviously have to say didn’t comport with the agenda of the Early Childhood Commission; an agenda that had nothing to do with what was best for parents or children but had everything to do with getting the government inside the home, increasing the power and position of the government, justifying more money, more growth, more power at the expense of the family.
Consider this comment, made by Rob Reiner on February 4, 1997, at the National Governor’s Association (NGA) conference, the same conference where Governor Locke obtained his “research”,
“They [the people of the US] are going to ask for... government coming into your home and telling you how to raise your children ... Then we as policy makers ... can say okay, these are the programs we can lay out for you ... I think there will be eventually a critical mass. It is just a matter of time.”
Government schools are no exception to the rule of government subsidizing problems. Today schools have school counselors, psychologists, and social workers. None of these individuals have passed a state medical exam that would be required of them to practice in the private sector. A clinician is someone who has successfully completed the rigorous education and training required to pass a state medical exam to practice as a licensed physician in a given field of medicine. That training is required in the best interests of the health and safety of the general public. And the time required for that education and training goes far beyond four years at a university or even two years post-graduate; it goes beyond obtaining a masters degree or even a doctorate degree.
School counselors, psychologists and social workers do not have that rigorous training. They are minimally trained, do not have a license to practice medicine of any kind, and carry certification from the state department of education. That’s it. One of the articles appearing in The St Louis Post-Dispatch makes it appear that innocuous type activities such as screening children is all these people do. That is absolutely untrue. Counseling is what psychologists, social workers and counselors do, and that counseling involves assessing children, counseling children, and addressing mental and behavior issues. And the assessments these people make, the profiles they complete on children become part of that child’s “life-long” electronic transcript or dossier of accumulated information, all coded according to the NCES (National Center for Education Statistics) SPEEDE/ExPRESS data element and subset codes. These electronic transcripts will be made available to prospective employers.
A document coming out of the Richland School District in Washington State a few years back contained bar codes that could be scanned for both children’s names and “observable behaviors.” These bar codes, part of the Learner Profile, were accessed using a forerunner to the Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) — a hand-held portable device on which information can be entered, stored, and transferred to a computer. In the advertisement for the hardware and software, it is stated:
“using … a list of observables you can create, you can instantly record observations anywhere … in the classroom, lab, shop, basketball court — even on a field trip. At the end of the day, your observations can be electronically transferred to your computer.”
It doesn’t take a great deal of imagination to figure out the “observables” that would be created by a school psychologist, counselor or social worker. Take that one step further and imagine the “observables” that could be created by an over-zealous school psychologist, counselor or social worker after being exposed to the TeenScreen screening form where the criteria for the various supposed disorders associated with suicide are listed. In an article published by The New York Times, the paper — referring to the work of the founder of TeenScreen, David Shafer, now chief of the Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry at Columbia University — stated,
“He (David Shaffer) studied records of 140 teenagers who committed suicide during the 1980's in and around New York City. Most exhibited at least one of three characteristics. The first was depression. The second was alcohol abuse - found in two-thirds of the 18-year-olds. And the third was aggression - beating somebody up or punching walls.”
Just imagine how many children could be labeled using that criteria?
How does a school and school district justify the salary and position of school social worker, psychologist or counselor? That can only happen if children continually need their services, justifying the FTE (Full Time Equivalent) money. Placing children in special needs programs (what used to be called special education), labeling them for special services, whether the children actually need those services, is how the positions and salaries are justified.
Take the case of the mother who discovered her Hispanic son, born in the United States, a United States citizen whose primary language was English, was placed in an ESL (English as a Second Language) class. This is a program funded by federal money. When she went to the school; she was given the cold shoulder. When she threatened to contact the US DOE her son was suddenly transferred to another class and the school was quick to state the matter was “a mistake”. But all the time her son was in that ESL program, losing valuable time that could have been spent on a worthy endeavor (if there is such a thing in government schools today), the school was applying for and receiving FTE money from the feds.
This is an all too common practice. Schools have learned that if you want more money, place more children in special needs programs. It isn’t the children who are truly in need of special services that the schools want. Just ask parents who have fought with the schools, and ended up suing the schools, to get the special services their truly disabled or deficient child needs. Schools are not reticent to state that providing special services to truly disabled or deficient children is too expensive. The schools want children who really don’t need the services but who can fill an FTE seat in a classroom where students are labeled in need of special services. And all the while the child is sitting in that seat and the school is collecting that money, the child is losing valuable time that could have been spent at a more worthy endeavor (if, again, there is such a thing in government schools today).
On October 21, 2004, President Bush signed into law the Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Act [P.L. 108-355]. This law has the distinction of being the nation’s first youth prevention suicide law claiming “that youth suicide is a public health crisis linked to underlying mental health problems.” It authorized $82 million in the form of federal grants over the next three years for suicide prevention programs, including voluntary screening programs like TeenScreen. The grants will be administered by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and address state-sponsored suicide prevention and intervention initiatives for youth, suicide prevention efforts for college campuses, and a national suicide prevention resource center.
Once again, the federal government, through de facto contracts (grants) that violate the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, is expanding its power and position. Who will benefit? Obviously, according to its website, TeenScreen is set to benefit.
Besides the fact that no “crisis” exists beyond that created, the U.S. Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) has stated the following regarding suicide screening:
“The USPSTF found no evidence that screening for suicide risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality. There is limited evidence on the accuracy of screening tools to identify suicide risk in the primary care setting, including tools to identify those at high risk (see Clinical Considerations). The USPSTF found insufficient evidence that treatment of those at high risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality. The USPSTF found no studies that directly address the harms of screening and treatment for suicide risk. As a result, the USPSTF could not determine the balance of benefits and harms of screening for suicide risk in the primary care setting.”
There is not one shred of evidence that TeenScreen has, can or will prevent suicide or that it can accurately identify youth at-risk for suicide.
Articles appearing in The St Louis Post-Dispatch, The New York Times, and The Star-Ledger (New Jersey), have glorified school counselors, psychologists and social workers as some kind of savior of children. Not so. One article, appearing in The St Louis Post-Dispatch, quoted a mother who praised the “free counseling session” her daughter received after being flagged with a mental disorder following a TeenScreen session. Had the mother not received the “free counseling session” would she have done anything? Obviously not. While she admitted she knew her daughter had been sleeping a lot before the screening, she did nothing about it. Parents who believe their children have a mental disorder have a responsibility to seek professional help through their family or primary care physician. The truism that “you get what you pay for” is one parents would do well to remember, especially when it comes to something as crucial and critical as the mental well-being of their children.
The number of school shooters found to have been on psychotropic drugs should send parents a very strong message concerning children and these type drugs — they are not necessarily a good combination; they can be lethal, they can have deadly consequences. Even the government has come forward saying these drugs can lead to suicide ideation, especially in youth. Yet here we have TeenScreen pushing kids to be labeled for a mental disorder for which these drugs can be prescribed. Is this what a responsible, caring organization does? Hardly.
Jane Pearson, PhD, head of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), in an article published on the NAMI website, has stated,
“For example, a prevention program designed for high-school aged youth found that participants were more likely to consider suicide a solution to a problem after the program than prior to the program.”
Read it again, parents, and heed the warning. One child committing suicide after being exposed to so-called prevention programs like TeenScreen is one child too many. And while TeenScreen would undoubtedly deny their screening caused the suicide, the product they are peddling carries no disclaimer stating that there is not one shred of evidence that TeenScreen has, will, or can prevent suicide.
That kids today are more stressed, more depressed, is not up for debate. The solution is. School counselors, social workers and psychologists screening and referring kids is not a solution. It is a justification for receiving a paycheck, receiving and spending more taxpayer dollars, more government intrusion in the family, more government control over the family, more destruction of the familial unit.
The solution lies in what we do not have — an education system educating children for intelligence. Instead we have a dumbed down system of education intended to produce a world-class worker — psycho-education where …
“… the real purpose of education is not to have the instructor perform certain activities but to bring about significant changes in the students’ patterns of behavior, it becomes important to recognize that any statement of the objectives … should be a statement of changes to take place in the student.” (Tyler, 1949)
Children are stressed; children are depressed … why wouldn’t they be? They aren’t getting an education. Their time in school is being spent demonstrating mastery of the wanted behaviors, the new basics: team player, critical thinking, making decisions, communication, adapting to change and understanding whole systems (WTECB; 1994). They are being shortchanged by adults who should know better.
The United States Government, in cooperation with your state government, has proudly brought you this dumbed down system of psycho-education. And since its full-blown implementation, in the early 1990’s, we have watched a steady increase in youth violence, whether in society or in the schools. The government created this problem, and the government will do what is necessary to subsidize the problem to warrant more money, more growth and more power.
Those benefiting from the subsidizing of the problem are organizations such as TeenScreen.
Those paying the price in this instance are the children.
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Widespread Drug Marketing Violations Occurred at American Psychiatric Association Convention
More Than Half Of Drug Makers at Convention Violated Rules
More than half the drug makers that participated in the 2002 American Psychiatric Association (APA) convention violated drug marketing rules set up by the association or the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Public Citizen writes in a study in the current issue of The Journal of Public Health Policy.
The study, funded by the Greenwall Foundation and the Medicine as a Profession Program of the Open Society Institute, examined 24 drug company booths at the 2002 APA convention by documenting interactions with pharmaceutical company representatives and collecting the gifts provided by the companies to physicians. Seven research assistants also gathered information by filling out a questionnaire with a checklist of potential promotional violations of the APA convention guidelines immediately after visiting the booths.
The researchers found 16 violations of the APA's exhibit rules: Eight companies had one violation and two companies (Eli Lilly and Pfizer) had four violations each. The most common APA violations were providing gifts valued at more than $10, booths with "glaring lights," promotional activity outside of the booth and giving away toys or stuffed animals.
The companies distributed a range of items including CDs, personalized luggage tags, palm pilot cases, bags, travel guides, mugs in velvet bags and phone cards. Other giveaways were invitations to meals, entertainment and art-related events.
Four companies were in violation of the FDA off-label marketing rules, either mentioning products for uses not approved by the FDA or discussing drug use at doses higher than what is recommended. Mallinckrodt violated both FDA and APA guidelines.
"This is strong evidence that the APA's voluntary guidelines have failed to adequately reduce inappropriate pharmaceutical company promotional activity," said Peter Lurie, deputy director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group and one of the study's authors. "Other voluntary codes now in effect * are likely to be similarly ineffective, in part because they lack enforcement capacity."
By Dennis H. Clarke
- HOW CHILDREN BECOME "MENTALLY ILL"
- HOW THE CHILD IS LABELED
- GETTING THE PARENTS TO BUY THE "DIAGNOSIS"
- CHEMICAL IMBALANCE?
- BIRTH TRAUMA?
- MAKING NOTHING OF THE CHILD
- HOW DOES RITALIN WORK?
- WHAT IS RITALIN?
- RITALIN ON THE "STREETS"
- HEROIN OR RITALIN
- HOW THE CHILD IS LABELED
- PSYCHIATRY DRUGGING OUR CHILDREN
- THE HAZARDOUS EFFECTS OF RITALIN (METHYLPHENIDATE)
- A. PHYSICAL HAZARDOUS EFFECTS OF RITALIN (METHYLPHENIDATE)
- B. HAZARDOUS RITALIN OVERDOSAGE
- C. HAZARDOUS HEART DISORDERS CAUSED BY RITALIN
- B. HAZARDOUS RITALIN OVERDOSAGE
- 4) WARNING: HEART ATTACKS
- D. HAZARDOUS BLOOD DISORDERS CAUSED BY RITALIN
- E. HAZARDOUS BRAIN DAMAGE AND BRAIN DISORDERS CAUSED BY RITALIN
- This data is offered as a public service.
This information has something to do with you. Children are the future of this civilization. What affects this society's children affects the society you live in now and the society you will live in tomorrow. Even if you have no children of your own, or if your own children have grown beyond school age, you will be affected by what is going on. This information is for your use.
This Information Letter is not intended to be a complete work on the subject of the drugging of America's children. As this is being printed in 1995, there are over two million of America's children on some of the most dangerous and addictive drugs known to man. These are mind altering and often brain damaging and addictive prescription psychiatric drugs. The files of documents on this subject are quite extensive. Other Information Letters will follow in this series and will contain more data about this for your use.
What follows is a brief summary of the data which is central to an understanding of the subject. We will begin with a description of the manner in which parents and teachers have been convinced to drug their children. The process is begun by indicating there may be something wrong with the child and evolves into a belief on the part of the parent that the child is "mentally ill."
The net result of this conclusion on the part of the parent is that the parent distances himself or herself from the child and turns the child over to the professionals to deal with. These children are then drugged as "therapy."
This Information Letter will also discuss the drugs that are central to this so-called therapy and how the prescription of these drugs has built into this country, the hard core of the drug addicts we now have.
You will learn that one of the most commonly prescribed drugs for children in America is chemically and neurologically equivalent to cocain in its effects on the human body. You will no doubt find this information startling. We have also found it so.
It is not always easy to confront evil. Nonetheless, the evil being done to millions of children in America needs to be confronted and ended, no matter who stands behind or profits from the evil deed of making drug addicts out of America's children.
Labeling a child, "mentally ill," is like hanging a sign around his or her neck saying, "GARBAGE: take it away.", Thomas S. Szasz, M.D., Professor of Psychiatry.
How do children as young as eighteen months become drug addicts? The answer is they were "diagnosed" and labeled as having a new "mental illness." Pediatricians and psychiatrists then "treat the mental illness" with some of the most dangerous and addictive substances known to man. The result for far too many of these children is a personal disaster.
Today, under psychiatry's invented criteria, there isn't a single normal childhood activity which doesn't fall within the broad "symptoms" which comprise so-called "mental illness." Some of the labels are: Attention Deficit Disorder, Hyperactivity, Minimal Brain Dysfunction, Learning Disability, Impulse disorder, Developmental Reading Disorder, Developmental Writing Disorder, developmental Arithmetic Disorder.
As a result of psychiatry pushing these labels for children, millions are being drugged and there has been a massive increase in the number of children in mental institutions over the past five years. The "criteria" under which a child gets labeled are so broad that if a teacher decides for any reason that a child is a "problem," there is no way the child can escape"diagnosis" and a label. It also appears that the less skilled the teacher, the greater the likelihood that there will be a problem with some children. Usually, these are the brightest and most active children in a class. Psychiatrists admit that the majority of the children being put on Ritalin are above average in I.Q. Of course, the child is always blamed for the problem.
It is known that if a child doesn't understand something he or she is being taught, the child can begin to fidget and cease to pay attention. If the teacher fails to notice this and carries on past the misunderstanding without clearing it up with the child, the child's behavior will deteriorate. The child then is accused of "not paying attention" or in psychiatric psycho-babble, is said to have "an attention deficit." Thus the child ends up labeled as having one of the new "mental illnesses."
Perhaps you doubt this is happening. You have every right to doubt it, for it is almost incredible. As you read further you will discover for yourself the so-called medical and scientific "criteria" for labeling the child. We encourage you to find and read for yourself the psychiatric texts we are about to refer to here. Remember, it is upon these criteria that children by the millions are being addicted to drugs like Ritalin, a drug which is chemically and neurologically equivalent to cocaine in its affect on the child's body. Bear in mind as well that once the child is "diagnosed " and labeled, the destiny of the child is no longer in the hands of his or her parents. The child is now, at least unofficially, a ward of the psychiatrist and subject to psychiatry's vested (money) interest in the child's so-called "insanity" or "mental disorder." A parents rights to refuse treatment of the child may be severely limited by law in some States.
What is "Attention Deficit Disorder"? Who "diagnoses" it? How is it treated? What are the results of that treatment? Who pays the bill? How is it that a "disease" no one even heard of a few years ago has swept through our children in our schools? Is this a more serious epidemic than AIDS? Is it contagious? Can you catch it from your children? Let's see if we can answer these questions from the writings of the "experts" who invented the "disease."
The American Psychiatric Association publishes a text called "The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders." This has been translated into German and forms the accepted guidelines for what are considered to be "mental illnesses," or as they are more modernly referred to, "mental disorders." The text is now in its third edition which was revised in 1987. It is generally referred to by its abbreviated title for its revised edition as DSM-III-R.
This reference text is the "bible"of the psychiatric industry. The "diagnostic numbers" for each specific label are accepted internationally and are used by the World Health Organization and the World Federation of Mental Health.
One of those numbers is 314.01 which indicates the "Diagnostic Criteria for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder" from the DSM-III-R. Millions of America's children have been labeled with this so-called disorder and put on Ritalin. See how for yourself. The following are the "criteria" for this "disease" taken directly without change from the psychiatric text.
- A. A disturbance of at least six months during which at least eight of the following are present:
- (1) [the child] often fidgets with hands or feet or squirms in seat. (in adolescents, may be limited to subjective feelings of restlessness)
- (2) [this child] has difficulty remaining seated when required to do so
- (3) [the child] is easily distracted
- (4) [the child] has difficulty awaiting turn in games or group situations
- (5) [the child] often blurts out answers to questions before they have been completed
- (6) [the child] has difficulty following through on instructions from others, example, fails to finish chores
- (7) [the child] has difficulty sustaining attention in tasks or play activities
- (8) [the child] often shifts from one uncompleted activity to another
- (9) [the child] has difficulty playing quietly
- (10) [the child] often talks excessively
- (11) [the child] often interrupts or intrudes on others, example, butts into other children's games
- (12) [the child] often does not seem to listen to what is being said to him or her
- (13) [the child] often loses things necessary for tasks or activities at school or at home, examples, toys, pencils, books, assignments
- (14) [the child] often engages in physically dangerous activities without considering the possible consequences, (example, runs into the street without looking).
- B. Onset before the age of seven.
- C. Does not meet the criteria for Pervasive Developmental Disorder.
These criteria would seem rather funny if they didn't result in these children being turned into drug addicts, criminals and lunatics by the prescriptions which follow. Invariably, those prescriptions alter brain chemistry, function and structure, thus altering the chemistry, function and structure of the body as a whole.
Ritalin and dozens of other psychiatric drugs are intended to do exactly that. The alteration of brain and body chemistry, function and structure result in what are called side effects which are actually the direct effects of these alterations. This is being done, for the most part, without any warning or with minimal warnings to the parents and with no warning whatsoever to the ultimate consumer and victim, the child. This is also being done by individuals engaged in a for profit industry.
If these are "medical criteria," Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder is a fraud being perpetrated on the parents, teachers and children of America by the psychiatric industry which is in constant need of new customers and by greedy drug manufacturers cashing in on this nations generous medical insurance and ignorance. The psychiatrists and drug companies win and the children and the future of society lose. It is as simple as that.
Attention Deficit Disorder is in fact, in the eyes of the beholder. It is seen by those with a vested interest in seeing it. When the occasional child is seen who is actually out of control, this "diagnosis" prevents discovery of the actual cause. What actual cause? The list could be almost endless, but the obvious ones are:
1. Undiagnosed and untreated physical illness or a physical condition causing the child distress such as inner ear infection, tooth ache, allergic reactions,
2. Physical abuse of the child at home or elsewhere in the environment including sexual abuse,
3. Study difficulties requiring personal attention to work through them with the child.
Some healthy children are more active than other healthy children and in fact the activity levels and attention spans normal children vary widely, even within the same family. The activity level of children changes over time as well, and this is a natural phenomena. It is far too easy today to label children so they can be shunted aside to then be chemically straight jacketed with the potent "speed" type chemicals like Ritalin and the amphetamines which are used interchangeably to subdue such children. The sole purpose for giving a child one of these drugs is to shut him up and to make it difficult for him to move. There is no other purpose because that is what these drugs are intended to do: make a quieter, less active child. Tragically, that is not all that they do.
The first task of the psychiatrist or other person who wants to drug and subdue the child is to get parents to agree to the "diagnosis." Thus, the "diagnosis" has to be presented as though it really means something. In actuality, it usually means that someone or several people are angry with the child for moving and making noise.
Parents are often told or led to believe that there is a real or scientific or even medical basis for the "diagnosis." This is an utter falsehood. There are only two "criteria" for what "attention deficit hyperactivity disorder" is. The first is listed above in the fourteen points of which the child needs eight. The second is based on the need for income on the part of the drug company and the psychiatrists and other so-called mental health workers.
While some psychologists and psychotherapists claim to have "other criteria" for "diagnosing" the child, these are based on the fourteen above and the result as far as the child is concerned is the same. The only difference is that more money is paid out to different people to do the mumbo jumbo of labeling the child.
One of the people who wants to drug and subdue the child, perhaps a psychiatrist, psychologist or school official may tell the parent that the child has a chemical imbalance in his brain. This is the standard line usually tried first on the parent. This is very upsetting to hear from an authority figure. It is a lie and an attempt to overwhelm the parent. As a parent, you have a right to know which if any chemical is out of balance and what brain test was used to measure that chemical. You have a right to know exactly how it would be brought back into balance if it could be found.
The truth is that you have a right to know that this is all an invention. Most of what you will hear is pure unfounded false "science" and is the product of the ravings of a single of psychiatrists in the US who first put it out as "theory" to attract drug company funding to his university. The theory, thus funded became the basis for a multi-billion dollar industry world wide which has attracted psychiatrists, pediatricians, insurance companies, school officials and teachers, all of whom profit, along with the drug companies, all at the ultimate expense of the children.
The truth is that there is no such test and there is no chemical imbalance other than the one Ritalin will create. The logic of the chemical imbalance is reversed to create an illogic but a profitable illogic for the psychiatric industry.
In real life, it works like this: The parent is told that a chemical imbalance is suspected. They are then told that the way to find out is to give the child Ritalin for a few days or weeks and to see if the child's behavior and attention span improves. When the drug is ingested, the child slows down and stares straight ahead quietly, thus giving the impression that he is paying attention. "Success" is thus dramatic and highly praised by all. With this change, brought on by the extremely potent drug, the psychiatrist says, "See, I was right. There was a chemical imbalance."
This is like checking to see if the child is sober by giving him alcohol to see if he gets drunk or giving him cocaine to find out if he was normal. In fact, as alcohol would make the child drunk, giving a child who has not yet entered puberty cocaine or Ritalin, would put the child into a stupor. The drug overwhelms the child's central nervous system and chemically straightjackets the child. Thus, the child would appear quieter and less active. In fact the child is less there and the psychiatrist says that he is "attending better." The only major difference between giving the child cocaine or Ritalin is that you would have to give the child more cocaine orally than you would give the child Ritalin orally to get the same result.
These children are not suffering from a cocaine or Ritalin deficiency. The practice of drugging children to quiet them while turning them into drug addicts should be completely illegal. The only real imbalance Ritalin and cocaine are curing is the imbalance in the bank accounts of the drug pushers who are turning America's school children into drug addicts.
No technique is too low when it comes to "convincing" parents to put a child on one of the most dangerous and addictive substances known to man. The parent is often told that the child's grades will suffer or continue to suffer unless the child is put on Ritalin. Most parents just accept this without question. In fact, it is false and is simply blackmail. Parents who are told this should immediately demand to see the medical and scientific studies which prove that Ritalin or cocaine for that matter improve a child's ability to learn, retain information and use what he is being taught. Even the manufacturer of Ritalin makes no claim that the drug has ever improving a child's ability to learn or retain or remember data. If any drug could actually do such a thing, it would have been in the headlines all over the world and no doubt, the inventors would be famous.
Instead, a devious system of marketing is used where in local advocates make false claims for the "miracle drug," which are miraculously never put right by the manufacturer. The manufacturer thus makes billions in profits while children are being made into drug addicts. Ritalin and cocain are not "smart pills." In fact, just the opposite is true. There is ample long term outcome data to show that in fact these children suffer myriad ill effects.
What this "smart pill" is really about is that if you allow your child to be drugged to a point where he is no longer bothering anyone, you will be rewarded with a better report card to go with your addicted child. Do not be led astray by the so-called scientific studies that say that Ritalin improves the child's ability to "attend" to tasks or complete work. For every so-called success story, there are dozens of shattered childhoods and lives. The author of this article has seen hundreds of the latter. Psychiatric mumbo jumbo or psycho-babble aside, it is your child's life that is on the line. Your child is too important to be left to the "experts." Those experts have presided over crashing SAT test scores throughout this Ritalin generation. The children put on Ritalin were usually the brightest and most active in their group.
One of the lowest and meanest tricks used to convince the parent to drug the child is to say that the child probably suffered an undetectable form of brain damage during a difficult birth or during a trauma in the womb. This tends to introvert the parent and make her feel guilty so she will follow the commands of the psychiatrist.
The psychiatrist has lied. This "brain damage" line was developed and used as a theory which resulted in millions of children in the United States and Canada being labeled and drugged as "minimally brain damaged." What were the criteria to show the brain damage? They were the same as the criteria for attention deficit disorder. The neurological societies in America put an end to this fraud there.
It was at that point that psychiatrists on behalf of the American Psychiatric Association invented attention deficit disorder to take its place. There never was any brain damage. Actual brain damage is visible on the EEG tests and with other newer instruments. It is not "treated" with brain damaging and addictive drugs like Ritalin or cocaine. The last thing one should do to a child with real brain damage is to damage the child further with Ritalin.
The psychiatrist who drugs children will attribute all "bad" things done by the child to "mental illness." He will say that these will be handled by the drug. After drugging the child, he will attribute all good things done by the child to his treatment or to the effects of the drug. This is simply more hocus-pocus and psycho babble. Children were children long before Ritalin and psychiatrists, and will continue to be children long after Ritalin and psychiatry are only found in the history books. While making nothing of the future of the race and making drug addicts of them is currently condoned, it is only a matter of time before this practice is outlawed. This is a criminal pursuit and should be labeled as such.
First, how does Ritalin work? According to the manufacturer, no one knows. What has been known since the late 1930's is that if you give a child who has not yet entered puberty a stimulant, it has an opposite effect to the effect it would have on an adult. Instead of "speeding" the child up, it apparently overwhelms the child's central nervous system and cuts the child's motors. The child goes into a stuporous state, the depth of which is determined by the milligrams of the drug, per kilogram (2.2 pounds), of the child's body weight. While no study has ever shown an increase in a child's ability to learn while on Ritalin, studies have shown that any amount in excess of .5 milligrams per kilogram of body weight is a detriment to learning. The higher the dose, the greater the impairment of the child's ability to gain, retain and use data. Almost all children on the drug are given doses far in excess of this amount. In addition, the other direct effects of Ritalin and the amphetamines which will be covered later in this article are also potential, even in the smallest dose ranges. The effects of Ritalin, amphetamines and cocaine, including the side effects are in fact indistinguishable.
It should be noted as well that when children who have not entered puberty are given depressants, narcotics, barbiturates or even antihistamines, all of which are normally central nervous system depressants or "downers," these act like stimulants on children. Parents giving their children phenobarbital or codeine in cough syrup may experience the "speeded up" activity of the child and not know why. It is a central nervous system reaction to the drug.
In addition, Ritalin is classified and controlled around the world by international treaty among all members of the World Health Organization in the same way and under the same laws as cocaine. The governments of the world know what the parents and teachers are never told.
Frankly, Ritalin is one of the most dangerous and addictive substances known to man. It is an extremely potent stimulant, a "speed" type drug, or "upper" as it is known to and is in high demand by "street" addicts. In the human body, its effect is chemically and neurologically equivalent to cocaine or the amphetamines.
While Ritalin is a different chemical from cocaine and the amphetamines, it has almost an identical effect with two important differences. First, milligram per milligram, Ritalin is more potent than cocaine or amphetamines. Second, the effects of Ritalin last longer than cocaine or the amphetamines.
Ritalin, when used on children, is given orally rather than being injected, snorted or smoked as with methamphetamine and cocaine. But the use of cocaine or amphetamines orally would have the same effect as Ritalin on the child, with the only difference being that more cocaine or amphetamine would be needed to get the same effect. It should be known that experienced addicts are unable to distinguish injected cocaine from injected Ritalin or injected amphetamines.
Before going into Ritalin used on children, this datum about the "street" use of injected Ritalin must be taken up as it is very important. Shockingly, over the past five years, injected Ritalin has become the number one heroin substitute in North America. This illegal use of the drug is now gaining acceptance with some addicts here in Germany. With the new push by psychiatrists to make the drug more widely used, Ritalin is now being found in use by the "street" addicts all over Europe.
While this article is mainly about the use of Ritalin on America's school children, the use of Ritalin on children creates a large "legal" market for Ritalin this is also then used as a cover for illegal purposes. As you will see, one of the most important immediate impacts of Ritalin use on children is that it is also then "diverted" and sold on the street illegally to heroin addicts for their use.
One may question whether it might not be better to have heroin addicts addicted instead to a "legal" prescription drug like Ritalin. The answer is a definite NO! The example of Vancouver B.C. in Canada and that city's experience with Ritalin as a "street" drug and a heroin substitute shows us why.
On the street, Ritalin is mixed with pain killers like Talwin or Percodan and injected like heroin. The similarities end there. The combination of Ritalin and a pain killer is called a "speed ball." Some addicts have described it as "speeding and feeling no pain." It has been said that "their feet never touch the ground." That is the immediate euphoric affect of the drug on the addict. In addition to the extensive list of hazardous and consequential effects of this drug when used as prescribed, and which is printed in the last section of this brochure, there are other devastating effects and social impacts of the drug when used by the addict. Some of the more important ones follow. These lessons were learned the hard way in Vancouver B.C., Canada. They are passed on in hope that the same mistakes can be avoided here.
While the average heroin addict normally uses heroin two to three times a day, the Ritalin addict will try to "shoot up" every 90 to 120 minutes. The combination of Ritalin and a pain killer is apparently far more addictive and harder to "kick" that heroin. The effect of the euphoria caused by the injection ends in one to two hours and is followed by an intolerable "crash." Addicts have described this "crash" as a nosedive into the oblivion of intolerable depression. The addict is thus driven to get the next needle and will do anything to get it. Some Ritalin addicts will inject the substance in combination with a pain killer up to 20 times per day.
According to confidential police sources, the cost of a Ritalin "speed ball" in 1995 in the US is sixty to eighty dollars. The addicts must steal five to seven times the value of his habit in goods and merchandise in order to get the money to feed his habit. In the late Eighties, in Vancouver B.C., as the heroin addicts in shifted from heroin use to Ritalin "speed balls," the burglary rate in the city rocketed 105% in one nine month period. It has remained at that level an higher since. Child addicts there and in places like Minneapolis aged nine to fourteen were found to be selling their bodies in prostitution to get their Ritalin "speed balls."
In Vancouver, poor families with no history of drug dealing were suddenly recruited into lives of crime by the huge profits to be made by selling Ritalin, which was prescribed for their children, to former heroin addicts who were now addicted to Ritalin.
The injection of Ritalin destroys the vein at the sight of the injection and often the needle mark will become infected with sores that will not heal. The addicts will often use up and ruin the usual veins in the arms, legs, hands and feet and begin "shooting" under fingernails and under the tongue and eventually will "shoot" into the neck and have even been known to use veins around the eyeball.
Because of the urgency on the part of the Ritalin "speed ball" addict to "fix," hygiene is almost completely omitted. Needles are often shared, and for this reason epidemics of Hepatitis and AIDS, as well as the often overlooked syphilis, have hit the addict populations. These are then transmitted by contact with prostitutes or through casual sex.
As with heroin use and for that matter the use of methadone (see Information Letter #3 : Heroin and Methadone addiction, Needle Parks and Psychiatric Terrorism), the addict is too "stoned" by the Ritalin "speed ball" to work. He or she cannot keep a schedule or care for self or a family without turning to crime. This is often a life of prostitution with theft its natural companion. In desperation these Ritalin addicts will often turn to more serious crime.
Later in this article, it is pointed out that Ritalin can create a distinctly anti-social frame of mind in the addict whether that addict is a school child or an adult. In the book, "Predicting Dependence Liability of Stimulant and Depressant Drugs," by the medical researchers Klaus R. Unna, M.D., Professor, Department of Pharmacology, University of Illinois at the Medical Center, Chicago and Travis Thompson, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Psychology and psychiatry, University of Minnesota, they say the following:
Perhaps the best-known effect of chronic stimulant administration is psychosis. Psychosis has been associated with chronic use of several stimulants; e.g., amphetamines, METHYLPHENIDATE (RITALIN), phenmetrazine and cocaine... [This] psychosis mimics paranoid schizophrenia or paranoia so closely that it has been misdiagnosed as such by experienced clinicians many times.
As you will learn, psychosis is only the beginning of consequential adverse effects of altering, perhaps permanently, Ritalin. States of extreme paranoia (where the person thinks all others are out to harm him or her) are common. Many very horrible crimes have been committed by people using Ritalin. Police in Vancouver recently reported crimes of all types were up in that city as a result of Ritalin use. The police chief said that 80% of the crime in Vancouver would cease if Ritalin could be taken off the market. This situation is now well underway in Europe and the US as well.
Before preceding any further with the data about the drugging of children with Ritalin, a special warning must be given regarding withdrawal from Ritalin. Ritalin is a very dangerous and addictive substance. After learning of the extreme dangers associated with Ritalin use, a parent may rightly decide to take the child off this drug. This should be done with the following well understood. The longer a child is on Ritalin the greater the potential is for serious consequences to occur. The following warning is based on a study of the medical literature on the subject of Ritalin withdrawal and actual case studies:
WARNING: According to the American Psychiatric Association, SUICIDE is the major adverse consequence of withdrawal from Ritalin and similar drugs. Suicides and attempted suicides by children on Ritalin have occurred when the drug was withdrawn or the dosage reduced. Suicides and attempted suicides have also occurred at normal dose levels without warning. Children should be watched for any signs of drug induced depression or other mental disturbance as these are common with the use of such powerful chemicals, particularly for periods lasting a week or longer. The effects of the drug may be cumulative within the brain and so the onset of adverse reactions such as suicidal thinking may be sudden and occur without warning. Special precautions should be taken during withdrawal or reduction in the amount used. Withdrawal or reduction of the amount of the substance used may also "unmask" drug induced states of severe paranoid delusional or psychotic states which can last for a year or longer after the last use of the drug. For this reason, children on Ritalin may hide their feelings and thoughts so no one will interfere with their attempt to destroy themselves.
Why would a parent allow a psychiatrist to put his or her child on such a dangerous drug? If you have been asking that question, you are not alone. Later in the brochure there is a partial list of the hazardous effects of Ritalin as they have been noted in the medical literature. These help to answer the question "why" from the viewpoint of the parent. The answer is that parents and teachers are almost never told what Ritalin is or the harmful effect it can have on the child. If they knew the actual "criteria" which comprise the so-called mental disorder and they knew the facts about the drug, there would not be enough children on Ritalin to justify its being manufactured.
Psychiatrists are telling parents and teachers that, in effect, these children are "mentally ill" or "mentally disordered." They are told that the situation is desperate and that "early intervention" in the form of "medicine" is needed to "save the child from a life of misery, criminality or worse."
Some parents and teachers are told that Ritalin will make it easier for the child to learn and retain data. This is also a false claim and is probably the biggest lie being promoted and told about Ritalin. Ritalin is not a "smart pill." In fact, it is the opposite of a "smart pill" The vast majority of children on Ritalin have either no improvement in their scholastic achievement or their actual achievement scores will deteriorate, sometimes drastically over time.
What is the long term outlook for children raised on Ritalin on a daily or almost daily basis? Exactly what you would expect if your child were raised on cocaine on a daily or almost daily basis. An American National Institute For Mental Health funded study, tells the sad tale:
- Forty-six percent of the children raised on Ritalin are charged with at least one major felony by the age of eighteen.
- Thirty percent are charged with two or more such crimes by the age of eighteen.
- Twenty-five percent of these children are institutionalized in mental institutions or prisons by the age of eighteen.
- Fifteen percent will threaten, attempt or actually commit suicide by the age of eighteen.
- Thirty percent are charged with two or more such crimes by the age of eighteen.
Rather than solving any problems, the mass drugging of America's school children has caused a massive crime wave and a wave of child suicide which has no precedent anywhere or any time in History. Prior to 1970, when Ritalin use began to be commonplace in our schools, child suicide was virtually unheard of. Today, it is an epidemic.
A. PHYSICAL HAZARDOUS EFFECTS OF RITALIN (METHYLPHENIDATE)
1) WARNING: Suicides and attempted suicides by children on Ritalin have occurred when the drug was withdrawn or the dosage reduced. Suicides and attempted suicides have also occurred at normal dose levels without warning. Children should be watched for any signs of drug induced depression or other mental disturbance as these are common with the use of such powerful chemicals, particularly for periods lasting a week or longer. The effects of the drug may be cumulative within the brain and so the onset of adverse reactions such as suicidal thinking may be sudden and occur without warning. Special precautions should be taken during withdrawal or reduction in the amount used. Withdrawal or reduction of the amount of the substance used may also "unmask" drug induced states of severe paranoid delusional or psychotic states which can last for a year or longer after the last use of the drug. For this reason, children on Ritalin may hide their feelings and thoughts so no one will interfere with their attempt to destroy themselves.
During Ritalin withdrawal or reduction of the amount of Ritalin used, the child can exhibit depression, irritability and anxiety. Fatigue with an inability to sleep or a need for continuous sleep may be seen. States of "driven" physical activity and agitation can be noticed.
Symptoms usually peak within two to four days although depression and irritability may persist for months. Suicide risk can persist for years. Studies have shown that approximately fifteen percent of the children on Ritalin will threaten, attempt or actually commit suicide by the age of eighteen. Psychiatrists almost always mis-diagnose the withdrawal effects of Ritalin as "underlying mental illness coming to the surface."
What has more likely occurred is that the drugging of the child has created a severe chemical disturbance in the child's brain and body, the symptoms of which have been hidden by the straightjacketing effects of Ritalin.
The longer the child is on the drug, the more severe this disturbance can become. It may be permanent in some of its manifestations. The solution is a drug free withdrawal from the drug and attention to the child's nutritional needs and rest under the care of a competent non-psychiatric medical doctor who is familiar with this data. : 11,42
B. HAZARDOUS RITALIN OVERDOSAGE:
(2) WARNING: Ritalin overdose causes over stimulation of the central nervous system and can lead to death. Signs and symptoms of overdose include the following: Vomiting, agitation, tremors, exaggeration of reflexes, muscle twitching, euphoria, confusion, hallucinations, delirium, sweating, flushing, headache, abnormally rapid and/or irregular heart beat, pounding heart, high arterial blood pressure, pupil dilation, dryness of mucous membranes, high fever and convulsions which may be followed by coma and death.
If Ritalin overdosage occurs, intensive and immediate medical care must be provided to maintain adequate blood circulation and breathing. External cooling may be required to prevent brain damage due to extremely high body temperature which may lead to convulsions, coma and death. Therefore, if Ritalin overdosage is suspected, one should seek immediate emergency medial treatment.
3) WARNING: Ritalin should not be mixed with so-called anti-depressant drugs. These can cause a dangerous drug interaction and reactions may include hypertension, seizures, and hypothermia. If these occur, immediate emergency medical attention should be sought and secured. : 39
C. HAZARDOUS HEART DISORDERS CAUSED BY RITALIN
NOTE: SEE WARNING NUMBER 131.Deaths of children on Ritalin caused by heart attack during play have occurred. One such case involved a 12 year old boy who had been on Ritalin for four years. The child had from time to time been noted as having a rapid irregular heartbeat. This was considered not to be a problem at the time. One day during the exertion of running the child fell to the ground with a very rapid and irregular heart beat, shortness of breath and chest pain. He was rushed to a hospital where the Doctor who had put the child on Ritalin examined him. The doctor assured the mother that there was no real problem with this incident and that it was caused by the Ritalin. The mother was told to continue the Ritalin dose and that this type of incident "will happen from time to time and you need not worry about it."
One week later, the child fell from his bicycle and died at the road side of a heart attack. An autopsy performed on the child revealed the product of years of irregular and occasionally rapid irregular heart beat. The child had a greatly enlarged heart due to the heart muscles working against each other during the phases of irregular beating of the organ.
5) DEATHS DURING ATHLETIC CONTESTS HAVE BEEN TRACED TO AMPHETAMINE USE: 41
6) CARDIAC ARRHYTHMIA: 11An irregular or erratic heart beat or variation from the normal rhythm of the heart. See 6. above.
7) PALPITATIONS: 11
8) TACHYCARDIA: 11Abnormal rapid heart beat. Hold your child and you will feel it.
9) INCREASED BLOOD PRESSURE: 3,6,12,15,27
10) INCREASED PULSE RATE: 12
11) POTENTIAL CARDIOVASCULAR COMPLICATIONS: 27
12) ANGINA: 11Angina means severe pain and constriction about the heart, also refers to a disease process in which spasmodic and painful suffocation or spasms occur. The complaints of children in this regard are often overlooked. They should not be. See #98 below.
D. HAZARDOUS BLOOD DISORDERS CAUSED BY RITALIN
13) VASCULITIS: 11This is an inflammation of blood vessels.
14) THROMBOCYTOPENIC PURPURA: 11A condition where there is a decrease in the part of the blood cell which coagulates the blood. This results in bleeding under the skin and accounts for the fact that children on Ritalin bruise easily. The bleeding under the skin produces a purple color to appear through the skin. Thus, the term "purpura."
15) LEUKOPENIA: 11Reduction of white blood cells. This can lead to a lessening of immunity response to disease and a lessening of the child's ability to fight infection.
16) ANEMIA: 11
17) INJECTIONS OF RITALIN CAN LEAD TO DEATH: 45
E. HAZARDOUS BRAIN DAMAGE AND BRAIN DISORDERS CAUSED BY RITALIN
18) LOWERS CONVULSIVE THRESHOLD: 11Ritalin apparently lowers the "convulsive threshold." This means that children with no previous history of epileptic seizures can become epileptic with seizures, convulsions or fits. All such seizures can cause permanent brain damage.
19) CONVULSIONS: 11,21See 18 above.
20) RITALIN CAN CAUSE GRAND MALL AND PETIT MAL EPILEPSY: 11
21) RITALIN MAKES EPILEPSY WORSE: 11
22) DON'T MIX WITH ANTI-EPILEPSY DRUGS: 11
23) STOP AT FIRST SIGN OF SEIZURES: 11
24) TOURETTE'S SYNDROMERitalin can cause Tourette's Syndrome in children with no family history of this sometimes debilitating neurological disorder. This is a condition of central nervous system damage which manifests itself by the child developing involuntary movements of limbs of the body and the torso and the diaphragm can spasm causing the child to make barking or coughing sounds. In about sixty percent of cases of Tourette's syndrome, the child will develop a condition called coprolalia. This means literally, "dirty mouth," and is a condition where the child will shout or bark out swear or curse words. In the United States, where Ritalin has been used heavily for the past thirty years, the incidence of Tourette's syndrome has gone from one in every 200,000 of population to an epidemic of one in every 200 school children in the United States. Drug companies are currently trying to avoid law suites over the new cases of Tourette's syndrome by hiring "researchers" to theorize that the condition is hereditary. We are to believe that some children have a genetic "predisposition" to the central nervous system damage called Tourette's syndrome. These are probably the same children who have a genetic predisposition to becoming as flat as pancakes when run over by a bus.
25) BRAIN DAMAGE MAY BE SEEN WITH AMPHETAMINE ABUSE: 40, 45
26) POTENTIAL CEREBROVASCULAR COMPLICATIONS: 27
27) HEADACHE: 11
28) DIZZINESS: 11
29) FEVER: 11High drug induced fever may be difficult to reduce without external cooling of the body. Often the child will complain of feeling cold and when the temperature of the child's body is taken the fever is discovered. If a high fever is allowed to continue, it can lead to convulsions, brain damage and death.
F. HAZARDOUS BODY DISORDERS CAUSED BY RITALIN
30) RITALIN CAN MUTATE THE CHILD BY NOT ALLOWING THE CHILD TO GROW TO FULL
SIZE, REDUCING BOTH HEIGHT AND WEIGHT: 11
31) HIGHLY ADDICTIVE: 42,44,45
32) LOSS OF APPETITE: 11
33) WEIGHT LOSS DURING PROLONGED USE: 11
34) NAUSEA: 11
35) ABDOMINAL PAIN: 11
36) DYSKINESIA: 11Ritalin can cause involuntary movements of face, neck, mouth and limbs.
37) DROWSINESS: 11
38) VISUAL DISTURBANCES: 11Ritalin causes the eyes to fail to work together. They may track objects at different rates.
39) SCALP HAIR LOSS: 11
40) DERMATOLOGICAL CONDITIONS: 11
41) ARTHRALGIA: 11This is a common complaint of children on Ritalin. It means that their joints ache and the child often suffers continuously from this, as it is not considered "serious" by the psychiatrists.
Most physical complaints of children on the drug are ignored by the prescribing psychiatrists. Psychiatry after all is not concerned with the physical well being of the child. Their concern when putting a child on Ritalin is to silence the child and to chemically shackle the child.
NOTE: Many of these are called minor "side effects" of Ritalin. The psychiatric instruction is to continue with the drug over the child's complaints or to increase dosage until the child stops complaining. This is commonly done. If you as an adult were on a drug which was giving you a itchy scaly rash, causing you to bruise easily, was making your scalp hair fall out, made your joints ache constantly, made you nauseated, stunted your growth, both height and weight and all the while was turning you into a drug addict, etc., how long would you stay on the drug?
G. HAZARDOUS PHYSICAL CONTRAINDICATIONS TO RITALIN USE ON CHILDREN
42) MANUFACTURER WARNS THAT RITALIN SHOULD NOT BE USED ON CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF SIX. THEY HAVE ONLY EXPERIMENTED WITH RITALIN ON CHILDREN OVER SIX AND THEREFORE CAN'T RECOMMEND IT FOR CHILDREN UNDER THAT AGE: 11
43) ALL ADVERSE REACTIONS MAY BE MORE FREQUENT IN THE ELDERLY AND CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF SIX.
44) ALL ADVERSE REACTIONS MAY BE MORE SEVERE IN THE ELDERLY AND IN CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF SIX: 11The younger the child the greater the risk of all complication associated with the use of Ritalin. In spite of this, in some areas, psychiatrists routinely put babies from 18 months of age and older on Ritalin. This is often seen in institutional settings for orphans or in care homes for abused or abandoned children. These children are almost always mutated by Ritalin, reduced in growth, both size and weight.
45) DANGEROUSLY HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE MAY OCCUR IF RITALIN IS COMBINED WITH FOODS CONTAINING TYRAMINE: 11
46) DANGEROUS ALLERGIC REACTIONS CAN OCCUR IN THOSE WHO ARE HYPERSENSITIVE TO THE DRUG: 11
47) PERSONS WITH GLAUCOMA SHOULD NOT USE RITALIN: 11The high blood pressures caused by Ritalin can blind persons with glaucoma
48) PERSONS WITH A HISTORY OF MOTOR TICS: 11These can and have developed into full Tourette's syndrome on Ritalin.
49) PERSONS WITH A FAMILY HISTORY OF TOURETTE'S SYNDROME should not use Ritalin: 11
50) IT SEEMS INAPPROPRIATE TO USE IT IN USUAL CLINICAL PRACTICE: 5
H. HAZARDOUS MENTAL AND EMOTIONAL DISORDERS CAUSED BY RITALIN
51) ANXIETY TENSION AGITATION: 42
52) NOT ON DEPRESSED CHILDREN: 11
53) CAN CONFUSE CHILD: 11
54) HAS COCAINE LIKE ACTIVITY: 12
55) HYPOMANIC AND MANIC SYMPTOMS: 1
56) SELF DEPRECATION: 2
57) PARANOID DELUSIONS: 2,3,4
58) INCREASED DELUSIONS: 3,5
59) ACTIVATES PREEXISTING DELUSIONS: 3,5,6
60) PARANOID PSYCHOSIS: 7,8
61) AMPHETAMINE LIKE PSYCHOSIS: 9
62) INCREASED PSYCHOSIS: 3,5,6
63) ACTIVATES PSYCHOTIC SYMPTOMS: 5,10
64) INCREASED PSYCHOSIS IN MANIC PATIENTS: 5
65) GREATER POTENCY RELATIVE TO AMPHETAMINES IN WORSENING PSYCHOSIS: 6,10
66) TOXIC PSYCHOSIS: 4,11,12
67) CAN SURPASS LSD IN PRODUCING BIZARRE EXPERIENCES: 14
68) HALLUCINATIONS: 3,13
69) VISUAL HALLUCINATIONS: 2,5
70) AUDITORY HALLUCINATIONS: 2,5
71) ACTIVATES PREEXISTING HALLUCINATIONS: 3,5,6
72) INCREASED HALLUCINATIONS: 5
73) EXACERBATES SCHIZOPHRENIA: 3,5,7,15,16,17,18,19
74) STIMULANTS COMMONLY PRECIPITATE PSYCHOTIC SYMPTOMS IN PATIENTS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA WHO ARE NOT KNOWN TO BE CLINICALLY ILL WHEN THE DRUGS WERE PRESCRIBED: 20
75) EXACERBATES SYMPTOMS OF BEHAVIOR DISORDER AND THOUGHT DISTURBANCE
IN PSYCHOTIC CHILDREN: 11
76) EFFECTS PATHOLOGICAL THOUGHT PROCESSES: 3
77) INCREASES IN GLOBAL PSYCHOTIC TEST RATINGS: 3,5,6
78) INCREASES IN PATHOLOGICAL THOUGHT PROCESSES: 3
79) INCREASES IN AUTISM: 3,5
80) INCREASES IN BOUNDARY LOSS: 3
81) INCREASES IN DISORGANIZATION: 3
82) CAN GIVE NON-PSYCHOTIC PATHOLOGICAL THINKING: 3
83) CAUSES LOOSENING OF ASSOCIATION: 3,5
84) INCREASES CATATONIC SYMPTOMS: 3,5
85) INCREASES BIZARRE BEHAVIOR: 3
86) INCREASES IDIOSYNCRATIC THINKING: 3
87) ACTIVATES PROJECTIONS: 3
88) ACTIVATES UNCOMMON WORD ASSOCIATIONS: 3
89) MUTENESS: 5
90) WAXY FLEXIBILITY: 5
91) EXTREME WITHDRAWAL: 5
92) INACTIVITY: 5
93) PARTIAL DISASSOCIATION: 21
94) INAPPROPRIATE ANSWERS TO STANDARD QUESTIONS: 22
95) EXTREMELY DISTURBING FOR PATIENTS WITH PSYCHOSIS: 21
96) AGITATION: 7
97) INCREASED TALKATIVENESS: 3
99) INCREASED INAPPROPRIATE AFFECT: 5
100) INCREASED FLATTENED AFFECT: 5
101) TERRIFIED AFFECT: 5
102) STARTED SCREAMING: 5
103) AGGRESSIVENESS: 5
104) ASSAULTIVENESS: 5
105) PANIC: 21
106) UNPLEASANT PRODUCTION OF TENSION: 21
107) CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM STIMULATION: 23
108) ANXIETY: 5,8,11,14,19,24,25,26
109) INSOMNIA: 11,42
110) RELIGIOUS PREOCCUPATIONS: 5
111) REBOUND DEPRESSIVE AFFECT: 19,21
112) SINCE RITALIN IS AN AMPHETAMINE-TYPE DRUG EXPECT AMPHETAMINE-LIKE EFFECTS: 6,12,18,27
113) AMPHETAMINES HAVE BEEN USED AS AGENTS OF TORTURE: 28
114) AMPHETAMINES INCREASE POSITIVE SYMPTOMS OF SCHIZOPHRENIA: 29
115) "PEP PILLS" ARE DANGEROUS: 30
116) PRODUCES PSYCHIC DEPENDENCE: 11,31
117) DRUG ABUSE: 4,5,7,12,14,18,32,33,42,43,44
118) HIGH ABUSE POTENTIAL DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION SCHEDULE II CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE. SCHEDULE II INCLUDES COCAINE, AMPHETAMINES, METHADONE, CODEINE AND OTHER ADDICTIVE LEGAL SUBSTANCES WITH A HIGH POTENTIAL FOR ADDICTION AND OR ABUSE. : 34
119) DECREASED REM SLEEP: 35 This precipitates psychotic states.
120) INCREASED EUPHORIA: 19 Symptomatic of chemically induced mental deterioration.
121) ABILITY TO HARM PATIENTS: 14,21,36
122) CREDIBILITY PROBLEMS WITH PATIENTS: 37,38 See suicide warnings.
123) ORGANIC BRAIN SYNDROME: 9 This means brain damage.
124) ANTIPSYCHOTIC DRUGS MAY NOT AFFECT THE INCREASE IN PSYCHOTIC RATINGS CAUSED BY RITALIN: 5,6
125) ABNORMAL BEHAVIOR: 11
I. HAZARDOUS MENTAL AND EMOTIONAL CONTRAINDICATIONS TO RITALIN USE
126) ANXIETY, TENSION AGITATION, AND SEVERE DEPRESSION: 11,31
127) CONTRAINDICATED IN AGITATED DEPRESSION: 4
128) SEEMED DEFINITELY CONTRAINDICATED IN PSYCHOTIC AND PREPSYCHOTIC PATIENTS: 21
129) MONITOR CLOSELY ON OR AROUND ANYONE WITH A KNOWN HISTORY OF DRUG ABUSE PARTICULARLY AROUND PERSONS WITH NEEDLES AND INTRAVENOUS DRUG ABUSE
130) IT SEEMS INAPPROPRIATE TO USE RITALIN IN USUAL CLINICAL PRACTICE: 5
131) "WARNING: SUFFICIENT DATA ON THE SAFETY AND EFFICACY (EFFECTIVENESS) OF LONG TERM USE OF RITALIN IN CHILDREN ARE NOT YET AVAILABLE." Quoted from CIBA Pharmaceutical Company in a product information release.This last warning comes after over fifty years that Ritalin has been around. In other words, if you have a child on Ritalin, and leave the child on for a "long term" which is not defined but can be assumed to mean over three weeks, you are on your own as far as CIBA Pharmaceutical Company is concerned. They have warned you.
Knowing what you now know, unless you were addicted to Ritalin, how long would you stay on Ritalin? How long should your child have to go through this?
Below is a list of references for you to use in speaking with physicians and school officials or others concerned with the matter of drugging children.
1. A. Lazare (ed.). Outpatient Psychiatry diagnosis and Treatment, Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1979, p.263
2. 1. above, p. 340.
3. D.S. Janowski
4. T.C. McCormick and T.W McNeal. Acute Psychosis and Ritalin Abuse. Texas State Journal of Medicine. 59: 99-100 Feb. 1963.
5. D.S. Janowski et al. Provocation of schizophrenic symptoms by intravenous administration of methylphenidate. Archives of General Psychiatry 28: 185-191, February 1973.
6. D.S. Janowski and J.M. Davis. Methylphenidate, Dextroamphetamine, levamphetamine. Archives of General Psychiatry 33: 304-308, March 1976.
7. Lazara, note 1. above, p. 585
8. A.M. Ludwig. Anxiety and Substance Abuse. Psychiatric Annual. 9:19-26, October 1979
9. M.T. Eaton, Jr., M.H. Peterson, and J.A. Davis. Psychiatry Medical Outline Series, 3rd ed. New York: Medical Examination and Publishing Company.
10. A.M. Freedman, H.J. Kaplan, and B.J. Sedlock. Modern Synopsis of Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry II, 2nd
11. B.B. Huff (ed). Physicians Desk Reference, New Jersy: Mediced. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1976, p. 962 Medical Economics Company, 1983, p. 866
12. W.R. Martin et al, Psychologic, subjective and behavioral effects of amphetamines, methamphetamine, phenmetrazine and methylphenidate in man, Clinical Pharmacological Therapy, 12:245-257, 1971
13. A.G. Gilman, L.S. Goodman, and A. Gilman (eds.) Goodman and Gilman's: The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, 5th ed. New York: Macmillan, 1975, p. 356
14. K.S.Ditman et al. Dimensions of LSD, methylphenidate and chlordiazepoxide experiences. Psychopharmacology (Berl.) 14:1-11, 1969
15. J.A. Lieberman et al. Methylphenidate challenge as a predictor of relapse in schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry 141: 633-638, May 1984
16. B. Angrist, J. Retresen, and S. Gershon. Response to apomorphine, amphetamine, and neuroleptics in schizophrenic subjects. Psychopharmacology 66: 31-38, 1980
17. D.P. Vam Kammen et al. d-Amphetamine-induced heterogenous changes in psychotic behavior in schizophrenics. American Journal of Psychiatry 139: 991-997, August 1982
18. R.J. Cadoret and L.J. King. Psychiatry in Primary Care, St. Louis: C.V. Mosby, 1974
19. R.C. Smith and J.M. Davis Comparative effects of d-amphetamine, l-amphetamine, and methylphenidate on mood in man. Psychopharmacology 53: 1-12, 1977.
20. M.A. Kropp and M.J. Chetson (eds.) Current Medical Diagnosis and Treatment. Los Altos California: Lange Medical Publications, 1981, p. 631.
21. G.A. Rogers. Methylphenidate interviews in psychotherapy. American Journal of Psychiatry 117: 549-550, December 1960.
22. B. Carey, M. Weber, and J.A. Smith, Methylphenidate hydrochloride (Ritalin) in the treatment of chronic schizophrenic patients. American Journal of Psychiatry 113: 546-547, December 1956.
23. Huff, note 11 above, p. 865.
24. G. Tollefson, et al. Anxiety and states benzodiazepines. AFP 27: 151-158, May 1983.
25. N.I.Stotland and L.M. Lesko. Anxiety and its management. Female Patient 8:19-34, 1983.
26. Lazare, note 1 above, p. 255.
27. D.S. Janowski et al. Comparison of oral and Intravenous methylphenidate. Psychopharmacology 59: 75-78, 1978.
28. A. Gellborn, Violations of Human Rights: Torture and the Medical Profession. New England Journal of Medicine 299; 358-359, August, 1978.
29. B. Angrist, J. Rotrosen, and S. Gershon. Differential effects of amphetamine and neuroleptics on negative vs. positive symptoms of schizophrenia. Psychopharmacology 72: 17-19,1980.
30. J.H. Talley. A useful patient handout in the management of depression. Family Physician 19:280-283, May, 1983.
31. E.S. Geftner (ed.) Compendium of Drug Therapy, New York: Biomedical Information Corporation, 1983-1984, p. 20:8
32. Table of Commonly Abused Drugs, Washington D.C.: American Psychiatric Press, p.1
33. Eaton et al. note 9 above, p. 244.
34. Schedules of Controlled Substances. Drug Enforcement Administration, 224, Wash. D.C., U.S. Department of Justice, DEA, December 1983, p.1.
35. V. Slomepovlos and L.O. Seneczke, Heterocyclic antidepressants in nonpsychiatric disorders. AFP 29: 203-208, March 1984.
36. A directory of the licensing law, Florida Board of Medical Examiners Newsletter 2: 1-6, January 1983.
37. R. Slavenko. Psychiatry and the Law. Boston: Little, Brown, 1973, p. 47.
38. Note 37, p. 50.
39. Lazare, note 1. above, p. 583.
40. Special Actions Office for Drug Abuse Prevention. Answers to the Most Frequently asked Questions About Drug Abuse. Wash. D.C.:Executive Office of the President; U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972, p. 15.
41. Note 40. p. 14.
42. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd Ed. Rev. American Psychiatric Association, Washington D.C., 1987, p. 109-110, 134-138, 175-176.
43. G.C.Hodding, et al. Drug Withdrawal Syndromes, Western Journal of Medicine, March 1980, p. 383-389.
44. T. Thompson and K. R. Unna (eds.) Predicting Dependance Liability of Stimulant and Depressant Drugs, Baltimore, University Park Press, p. 81-83.
45. K. Whyte et al. Silent Scourge: How Two Obscure Prescription Drugs Cause Most of Our Crime. Western Report 2:2 1987, p. 38-44, Interwest Pub. Ltd. Edmonton Alberta, Canada.
47. J. Satterfield, et al Therapeutic Interventions to Prevent Delinquency in Hyperactive Boys, J. Amer. Acad. Child Adol. Psychiatry, 1987,26, 1: 56-64.
48. The PDR Family Guide To Prescription Drugs, 1997, 546-549
This data above has been acquired over a period of thirty years and is offered as a public service. Data related to specific drug effects are taken from authoritative medical and pharmaceutical references.
I recommend that persons who feel that they suffer or that their children suffer from any of the symptoms described in this brochure seek competent medical examination by non-psychiatric specialists. The purpose of this article is not to provide medical advice but to suggest that one should consult qualified persons and sources in medicine before committing to an irreversible course of "treatment" for your child or another.
If your wish is to raise your child drug free and anyone is trying to force you to put your child on dangerous drugs, I hope this data is of use and will help. Your child has a basic human right to the security of his or her body. This must not be compromised by psychiatry or drug manufacturers or pushers for their monetary gain.
Our children are the future of the civilization. That future is being compromised by drug pushers, some with an, "M.D.," after their names and many of whom are also called psychiatrists. Ritalin use on the children of America is the product of psychiatrists working with the profiteering drug cartels. They must not be allowed to win the chemical warfare they are waging against our future, the children of America.
Dennis H. Clarke
Copyright © 1997 By Dennis H. Clarke. All Rights Reserved