ADD: A DESIGNER DISEASE

[Guest guest]

ADD: A DESIGNER DISEASE

 

- Tim O'Shea

 

 

 

Designer jeans, designer shirts, designer handbags, designer watches, jewelry,

perfumes, neckties, shoes, - what are they? Take an ordinary item, put a name on

it, a couple million in marketing and promotion, and voila' - its value is

raised tenfold, or more. How? By skillfully creating an illusion of worth in the

malleable, fickle, public " consciousness. "

 

Same with ADD. Everyone gets mildly depressed from time to time. That's

ordinary. Kids get rowdy sometimes. That's ordinary too. Our attention wanders,

we get distracted, we have difficulty finishing a task. So what? Welcome to

life. But to turn these everyday experiences into diseases that can be compared

with cancer or diabetes, actual medical entities - that takes real marketing and

dog-wagging mastery. So what do we need? A new disease, but we don't have time

to discover one? No problema. We do have the most advanced marketing machine in

human history already in place. We can create a disease out of almost nothing.

But it won't be a real disease. It will be

 

A Designer Disease

 

Even before I started researching the topic, I had instinctively doubted the

existence of ADD from the time when I first began hearing about it. Sounded very

suspicious to me. I wondered, why does ADD only exist in the U.S. and not in

Scandinavia, not in The Netherlands, not in France, not in Fiji, and not in

Japan? A disease that respects geographic borders? Where has it come from all of

a sudden, to go from nothing to being a household word in just a few short

years? Like Jack Nicholson says, faced with a basic question, following the

money usually brings you closer to the truth.

 

Even a superficial glance at the billion-dollar Ritalin industry raises that red

flag. What I was not prepared for was the invidious, systematic assault on

American children and the shared benefit for so many players: parents, teachers,

American psychiatrists, school personnel, lobbyists, the drug empire - a

convoluted dynamic that has taken on a life of its own and blanketed the public

consciousness with the requisite superficial line of junk science and PC

doubletalk.

 

If the reader had unlimited time, in order to place the following chapter in

proper perspective, I would recommend that he stop reading at this point and

only continue after a complete re-reading of two classics: 1984 by George Orwell

and Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. One needs to be reminded from time to time

of man's capacity for calculated treachery and for keeping the truth that lies

just beneath the surface so well hidden, when great fortunes are at stake.

 

Doing a net search for ADD is a revelation: thousands of articles and websites

spring up onto the screen, 99+% of them parroting the same tired, recycled spin

on the safety, efficacy, and necessity of drug intervention to " control " this

" new " " epidemic. " Most of them are one or two pages, unreferenced,

unsubstantiated, going around in circles, written at the compulsory 9th grade

level, almost capable of making me believe that ADD must really exist, because

this is how its sufferers write.

 

Only with persistence can one come up with the body of work composing the

attached reference list. A new point of view is tenable, it is consistent, and

in my opinion self-evident after one resolves to answer the questions which

follow.

 

 

WHAT EXACTLY IS ADD?

 

Attention Deficit Disorder, according to the American Psychiatry Association,

hereinafter noted as the APA, is a recent disease that supposedly afflicts

almost 5 million Americans, mostly young boys. ADD is generally characterized by

hyperactivity, with tendencies toward fidgeting, loud outbursts, learning

disabilities, and generally unruly behavior. It is perhaps the only disease in

American history which may be legally diagnosed by people with no medical

credentials whatsoever, including teachers, school counselors, aides,

principals, coaches, even parents. No lab tests, blood tests, microscope

studies, or definitive diagnostic tests exist for ADD. No consistent genetic

basis or organic neurological lesions, or any verifiable physical changes have

ever been identified as causative of ADD.

 

There is no objective scientific proof that the disease exists. On the contrary,

overwhelming evidence shows that ADD was invented in 1980 by the American

Psychiatric Association in order to bolster the position of its failing

profession. Politics and economics took over almost immediately, seeing a way to

allocate billions of dollars in drugs and professional fees to " combat " the new

" epidemic. " When reading anything about ADD, it seems essential to keep one

central notion clearly in mind: ADD is not a medical entity; it is economic and

political. I soon discovered I was not alone in this sentiment:

 

" ADD does not exist. These children are not disordered. "

Thomas Armstrong, PhD

The Myth of the ADD Child

" Both the FDA and the DEA have acknowledged that ADD is not a disease, or

anything organic or biologic. "

Fred Baughman, MD

The Future of ADD

" We have invented a new disease, given it medical sanction, and now we must

disown it. "

Diane McGuiness

" The Limits of Biologic Treatment for Psychiatric Distress "

" Research does not confirm the existence of an ADD syndrome -- There is no

medical, neurological, or psychiatric justification for the ADD diagnosis. "

Peter Breggin, MD

Toxic Psychiatry p 281

" Be forewarned that ADD is not a real disease, but rather a contrived illusion

of a disease, a marketplace tool. "

Fred Baughman,MD

 

Whoa! I wasn't ready for all that!

 

 

WHY DID ADD APPEAR?

 

 

To address this question, it is necessary to take a brief look at the American

Psychiatry Association in the past century. In Chapter I of his remarkable work,

A Dose of Sanity, psychiatrist Sidney Walker gives an illuminating historical

summary of his profession during the past 150 years.

Psychiatrists are MDs who specialize in mental disorders. Classically, they

study organic, physical causes of mental illnesses such as brain tumors,

infections, and other diseases that might have a psychological component.

 

The father of American psychiatry was Benjamin Rush, a signer of the Declaration

of Independence. His book Diseases of the Mind, 1812, dealt with biological

causes of mental illness. In other words, mental illness was seen generally as

the result of another disease, such as tuberculosis, syphilis, or a tumor.

 

In the 1800s, psychiatrists like Griesinger, Alzheimer, and Kraeplin

concentrated on brain anatomy and nerve cell irregularities as the cause of

mental disorders. For over a century psychiatrists sought the underlying

physical causes of mental illness.

 

Microscope study of brain slices was employed by world class psychiatrists like

Adolph Meyer in the late 30s, looking for brain lesions that could be linked

with mental problems.

 

This scientific approach began to change with the emergence and prevalence of

the notions of Sigmund Freud around 1940. Although Freud's ideas about sexuality

and the unconscious mind have made a lasting impact on the study of the human

mind, Sidney Walker feels that for the first time, the brain was left out of the

picture. Physical disease processes were no longer considered as the first place

to look for the cause of mental illness. Freudian psychology concentrated on

" the mind " itself, as if the mind were separate from the brain. For the first

time in its history, the direction of psychiatry was no longer guided by medical

physicians. Instead, psychologists took over the field, with their focus on " the

psyche. " Most mental illness, they said, resulted from " adverse events, " such as

childhood trauma, parent relationships, and early experiences. Never before has

a medical specialty been assumed by " non-medical participants. " This was a

mistake from which it would take psychiatrists

40 years to recover.

 

In the 1950s and 1960s we saw the rise of psychoanalysis : the talking doctors.

Their promise was to cure mental illness by psychotherapy. Sidney Walker

attributes the decline of psychiatry before 1980 to the failure of

psychoanalysis and psychotherapy to deliver. By and large they didn't work that

well. Ignoring the biological and organic causes of mental disease was the

reason, according to Dr. Walker. The profession had abandoned its roots, which

held that mental illness was generally " in reaction to " some underlying physical

disorder. They had traded a scientific approach for a non-scientific one.

 

The 1970s saw the emergence of the fore-runner of ADD: minimal brain disorder.

Same pseudo-scientific underpinnings as ADD - vague rationales for targeting a

vulnerable new market for " treatment, " supported by the drug companies. Same

opportunities for liberal, socialistic expansion and job creation to " diagnose "

and monitor the newly discovered epidemic. Nixon's own psychologist, a Dr.

Hutschnecker, penned a now-famous memo in 1970 in which he recommended mass

testing of very young children in order to ascertain possible 'pre-delinquent'

behavior patterns. Even though the memo was discredited by the APA itself,

political support snowballed and became the focus for policy for the coming

decade. The new magic words were disability and intervention. It was the dawn of

the age of the Professional Victim.

 

The story is told with detail and clarity in Peter Schrag's The Myth of the

Hyperactive Child.

 

Having failed to reform the malfunctioning institutions, the new game was to

reform the individual. With no scientific basis, new words came into use:

" pre-delinquent " " dyslexia " and " learning disabled. " By 1995, over 50% of

American children are identified as either 'learning disabled' or ADD! Schrag

outlines how an entire empire of social, educational, political, medical, and

economic power willed itself into existence in a few short years. The shoddiest

of scientific studies were thrown together, funded by the drug companies, in

support of the new politics of the state's new right to determine " normal "

emotions and behavior.

 

Though most of these studies were eventually discredited, they served as a

foundation for similar " scientific documentation " during the 1980s, in which

nonconformity suddenly became a medical condition requiring treatment.

 

During the 1970s, people were going to family doctors, psychologists, social

workers, priests, and marriage counselors for their problems, none of whom were

prescribing drugs for minor complaints of depression. Year by year,

psychiatrists were failing to attract voluntary patients, simply because the

need was not perceived by most people.

 

ENTER ADD

 

So with the stock of the APA at an all-time low, we come to 1980 and the now

famous APA Committee meeting. It was at this meeting that the APA decided to

" re-medicalize. " That meant giving up on this talking-cure psychoanalysis stuff

which was pushing the profession into the basement, and re-asserting themselves

as real medical professionals with the right to be successful and sell a ton of

drugs. As you might imagine, no one was happier to hear this news than the

pharmaceutical industry, but we'll get to that. Maybe they couldn't get

voluntary patients, but what about involuntary ones?

 

The only problem was, if the psychiatrists were to successfully reestablish

themselves as medical doctors, they needed a new disease within their specialty

which would be cured by drugs. Enter ADD stage left, first named as a disorder

by the APA in their 1980 meeting. Forget the fact that ADD had been around for

almost a century under 25 different names, listed on p 8 of Dr. Armstrong's

book. That didn't matter. What was of major significance was that now ADD had

reality: it was finally named and described in the APA's bible, the Diagnostic

and Statistical Manual, cited hereinafter as the DSM.

 

 

THE BIBLE SPEAKS

 

Breggin, Armstrong, Wiseman, and Baughman go on for pages about the significance

of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. I direct the reader to them for a

fuller understanding of the insidious role this book has played in catapulting a

declining profession into a position of wealth and respectability, at the

expense of the well-being of millions of defenseless children. If that sounds

harsh or strident, I've got a feeling it's an understatement. Don't take my word

for it. Now, about the Manual.

 

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual was first published by the APA in 1952.

The DSM is a catalogue of mental disorders. Each disorder has a list of symptoms

under it. A patient may be " diagnosed " as having a particular mental disorder if

enough of the listed symptoms are present. Although the instructions in the DSM

caution psychiatrists against using the DSM as a " cookbook " because there is so

much overlap and so many other factors to consider before a supportable

diagnosis can be made, in actual practice the cookbook method is precisely the

way DSM is most commonly used.

 

Psychiatrists have been very busy since 1952. Each new edition of the DSM is

bigger:

 

Title- Year # of mental disorders

DSM 1952 112

DSM-II 1968 163

DSM-III 1980 224

DSM-III-R 1987 253

DSM-IV 1994 374

 

 

Lest the reader assume that each of these " illnesses " was researched and studied

in the same scientific manner as a physical illness before one appears in

pathology textbooks, here are what a few professionals have to say:

 

Renee Garfinkel, a psychologist and representative of the APA who attended DSM

meetings, told Time magazine:

 

" the low level of intellectual effort was shocking ... Diagnoses were developed

by majority vote on the level we would use to choose a restaurant. You feel like

Italian. I feel like Chinese. So let's go to a cafeteria. Then it's typed into a

computer. It may reflect on our naivete', but it was our belief that there would

be an attempt to look at things scientifically. " (Walker p22)

 

Al Parides, MD, a psychiatrist, states that the DSM is not scientific at all,

but a masterpiece of political maneuvering, in which the normal problems of life

are turned into psychiatric conditions. (Wiseman, p 357)

 

How a mental disorder winds up in the DSM in the first place is a long and

enlightening story, for which the reader is directed to the studies by Walker

and also by Louise Armstrong.

 

" To read about the evolution of the DSM is to know this: it is an entirely

political document. What it includes, what it does not include, are the result

of intensive campaigning, lengthy negotiating, infighting, and power plays. "

- Louise Armstrong

 

An unsuspecting neophyte like myself might expect that for a mental disorder to

appear in the primary handbook of the profession licensed to treat mental

disorders, years of research, experimentation, and double blind studies would

have had to come first, right? Guess again. Armstrong cites the story of the

origin of a disorder called " self-defeating personality disorder. " The chairman

of the DSM committee, Robert Spitzer, thought up the disorder on a fishing trip,

and when he returned, persuaded enough of the committee to include it in the

Manual. It goes on from there. (And They Call It Help)

 

 

SNAP DIAGNOSIS

 

The DSM is the only way that ADD is diagnosed. Here's how it's done: In the DSM,

ADD has nine symptoms listed under it. If a child has any six of them, in the

opinion of the doctor (or the teacher!) that child may be diagnosed as having

ADD. That's it! Funny thing is, it seems like most of these entries on the list

are not symptoms of a mental disorder, but just symptoms of being a kid:

 

1. Often fidgets with hands or feet or squirms in seat

2. Often leaves seat in classroom or in other situations in which remaining

seated is expected

3. Often runs about or climbs excessively in situations in which it is

inappropriate

4. Often has difficulty playing or engaging in leisure activities quietly

5. Is often 'on the go' or often acts as if driven " by a motor "

6. Often talks excessively

7. Often blurts out answers before questions have been completed

8. Often has difficulty awaiting turn

9. Often interrupts or intrudes on others

Sound like anyone you've ever known? Some may ask if there are any kids who

would not fit six of these criteria. The reader should understand that this is

the only " diagnostic " " testing " that exists for determining ADD. Six out of

nine. No lab test, no blood tests, no physical examination whatsoever, no

standardized batteries of written or verbal psychological testing. Just these

nine. And unlike any other disease in history, the diagnosis may be made by

anyone in authority, with no medical credentials or training whatsoever: the

school nurse, school counselor, a teacher, the principal, a coach...

 

DSM cookbook diagnosis of any disease is a ridiculous oversimplification and the

primary reason so many modern psychiatrists are embarrassed by their own

profession. Differential diagnosis of any disease, especially a mental disorder,

requires time-consuming, thorough testing, analysis and thoughtful

consideration, ruling out several possibilities, one by one, before arriving at

the final diagnosis, which itself is still subject to change. DSM cookbook

diagnosis, by contrast, which is standard in the profession according to most

sources, is quick and easy and absurdly oversimplifying. Many patients are often

labeled ADD after a 15-minute interview with a pediatrician, who has no training

in mental disorders at all. As Dr. Walker says, DSM is usually a " substitute for

diagnosis " not part of any scientific differential process of ruling out likely

possibilities.

 

In the 21st century, psychiatry has lost its identity as a profession, according

to psychiatrists like Peter Breggin, MD. Today psychiatry has sold most of its

traditional values in exchange for being " dominated by the interests of the

multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical industry, as the profession becomes wholly

dependent on the drug companies for its survival. " In the meantime, several

million Americans " will suffer permanent brain damage from psychiatric drugs and

electroshock while the profession denies it is happening. " (Toxic Psychiatry,

p17).

 

LABELING

 

is the new game, the new psychiatry, the new bait and switch. Labeling is what

psychiatrists now offer in place of diagnosis. Take a moment to understand the

difference. When a patient with a mental disorder presents to a doctor for the

first time, there are literally dozens of possible physical, organic disease

processes which could be the cause. If the doctor misses the underlying disease,

because it is subclinical (only beginning) or because standard physical

examination is glossed over in favor of the 15-minute DSM cookbook approach, it

is doubtful whether another doctor will take the trouble to look for another

cause. Why bother? DSM diagnostic labels, like " depression " or " delusional

dominating personality disorder " remain on a patient's chart for life.

 

These labels are too frequently the end of the line, as far as trying to

diagnose the cause of the mental problem. Most doctors will hesitate to

challenge the diagnosis of a colleague, especially if it requires a lot of new

work. The result is that a patient may be labeled " depressed " but in actuality

be depressed because of one of the following:

 

rickettsial infection hypoglycemia brain tumor

brain infection hypothyroid toxic poisoning

anemia malnutrition parasites

vitamin deficiency dehydration

 

 

to name just a few.

 

Once the disease is labeled, powerful psychoactive drugs are prescribed, which

cover up the depression. Meanwhile the underlying disease may progress

unchecked, often to the point where years of illness will result. Rare? Think

again. Standard physical exams are not routinely done by today's psychiatrists.

A comprehensive study in the American Review of Medicine by Dr. Erwin Koranyi

estimates misdiagnosis of easily detectable physical illness and labeling them

as mental illness occurs half the time! Koryani's study of 2090 psychiatric

patients showed that 43% of them had an undiagnosed underlying major illness.

Dr. Koryani explains that once a patient is labeled a psychiatric case, physical

complaints are assumed to be " psychosomatic " and are routinely ignored.

 

Neurologist Sir Francis Walshe describes mental hospitals as

 

 

" living museums of undiscovered bodily disease . . . undiagnosed. "

 

For a person who has ever been diagnosed as depressed or having ADD, certain

types of health insurance may be denied for life. Anyone who takes Ritalin or

similar psychotropics after age 12 is automatically rejected from the military.

(Breggin, p.27) If the person is ever injured, and litigation becomes necessary

to document the injury, these labels are powerful tools that are often used

against the person's case, to undermine credibility and the reality of the

injury.

 

It gets worse. The reader again is directed to further explore the tip of this

iceberg. The bottom line is that labeling doesn't cure anything. Misdiagnosis

and cookbook labeling commonly delay appropriate treatment for hundreds of

thousands of patients. Labeling is not treatment.

 

WHO BENEFITS FROM ADD?

 

Simple answer: almost everyone involved.

 

First, the psychiatrists. To really understand the role of psychiatry in the

modern world, one must come to terms with the information contained in works

such as Psychiatry: The Ultimate Betrayal. Wiseman thoroughly documents the

contributions of psychiatrists to the world over the past 150 years:

 

 

Extermination of 375,000 mental patients in Germany, prior to the Holocaust

Providing Hitler with the rationale and method for the Holocaust itself

Over 100,000 lobotomies between 1936 and 1970

Millions of worthless and unnecessary electroshock treatments of the brain

Replacing the idea that the citizen is personally responsible for his actions

with the notion that other factors are always to blame

Addicting large segments of the population to dangerous drugs like Ritalin,

Elavil, Valium, and Prozac

Infecting the courtrooms of the nation with absurdities like ìrecovered memory,

" " ìirresistible impulse, " " ìurban stress syndrome, " " and ìtemporary insanity

" "

 

As cited above, in 1980 the APA was at low ebb. The rest of the medical

profession no longer respected psychiatrists because by allowing their direction

to be determined by non-medical personnel, the failures of psychotherapy were

pre-eminent. Today after 20 years of aggressive public relations ramjetting ADD

into the public consciousness, psychiatrists find themselves back in the

driver's seat. Each of the 5 million ADD children requires some $1200 in

diagnostics, although not all of them receive it. Perhaps only 1 million are

being treated at this time. So that's only about $12 billion, although with a

potential of $60 billion. And that's not even including medications.

 

By 1997, drug sales alone surpassed $1.5 billion per year (Wiseman, p.1) for the

psychotropics. That figure is much higher by now. So the immediate financial

future of cookbook-toting psychiatrists looks fairly bright. The majority of

them have ridden ADD into the millennium, accounting for 99% of the current

" informative " websites on the topic.

 

Not all doctors are that impressed by the scientific validity of the psychiatric

profession when it comes to the ethics of their intent toward children. Thomas

Szasz, MD, in his book Cruel Compassion, tells us:

 

 

" This elementary fact makes the child psychiatrist one of the most dangerous

enemies not only of children, but also of adults who care for the two precious

and valuable things in life - children and liberty. Child psychology and child

psychiatry cannot be reformed. They must be abolished. "

Don't sugar-coat it like that, Tom.

 

Bruce Wiseman, author of Psychiatry: the Ultimate Betrayal, concurs:

 

 

 

" All vestiges of psychiatry and psychology should be removed from our schools.

Schools are for learning. They are not for psychiatric experiments on young

minds. " p385

 

Definitely a 21st-century opinion.

 

Second, the pharmaceutical industry. Ciba-Geigy, the producer of Ritalin has

found itself at the center of a boom market. In 1974, an Rx for 100 Ritalin

tablets was $12. Today it's $150. For this one drug alone, 6 million Rx's are

written annually at a cost of about $150 each. That's $900 million annually

today, and that's only the domestic market. There are also several other drugs

for ADD, bringing in other millions, including Cylert, Dexedrine, Disipramine.

(After so many deaths from liver disease, Cylert was eventually banned in

Canada, but not the U.S.) Some estimates by " studies " funded by Ciba-Geigy and

backed by the APA are now saying that as much as 30% of the child population may

be " in need of " drug treatment for this new disease which has just been

miraculously discovered. The current 1 million kids on Ritalin - that's only the

beginning!

 

To keep the ball rolling, Ciba donates millions of dollars every year to a

" community " organization known as CHADD: Children and Adults with ADD. CHADD now

has over 35,000 members in 600 chapters nationwide. It has become the de facto

PR branch of Ciba for disseminating promotional information about Ritalin,

describing it as " safe and effective " for treatment of ADD.

 

Third, teachers. It doesn't take much study to discover the deplorable condition

of today's American education system, especially grade schools and high schools.

Most studies assessing overall literacy at the 12th grade level across the

nation come in at about 50%. (Wiseman) In 1900, illiteracy was about 1.9%!

 

 

Here's a graph of SAT scores from 1955-1994:

 

* * *510 * * 500 * * * 490 * * * 480 * * * * 470 * *math

 

* * *460 * * * 450 * * 440 * * * 430 * * * 420 * *.......verbal skills

 

1955-1960-1965-1970-1975-1980-1985-1990-1995

 

 

Source: US Dept of Education Digest of Education Statistics 1997 p 133

 

Very difficult to find this chart. Kids are doing so badly, the whole SAT system

has now been " re-centered " and re-named " SAT-9 " in order to disguise the actual

low performance of today's students when compared with the recent past. What

they did was this: educators arbitrarily raised the whole scale at least 20

points, all at once, so that it didn't look as though kids were really getting

dumber year by year, which they certainly are. Need proof? Hand a high school

junior a page from Charles Dickens or Jane Austen and ask him to read it aloud.

 

In a nation where half of high school graduates cannot competently read or

write, consider what a blessing ADD has been to beleaguered school teachers.

We're off the hook! It's not our fault! These kids are disordered - there's

something wrong with them. Blame the victims. Besides removing blame, an

overstressed teacher may now get to remove the student as well: a diagnosis of

ADD frequently gets a disorderly student out of the class and into a special

Learning Disabilities class. (This is another gigantic contrived social

invention, along with dyslexia, but it is beyond the scope of this chapter.) At

the very least, the child will be prescribed Ritalin and will now be manageable.

The best news for teachers is that they don't even have to wait for a

psychiatrist to pronounce a kid ADD. In our modern Orwellian setting, the

teachers can do it! All they have to do is check off six of the nine DSM

" symptoms " and the student may be out of there.

 

" the vast majority of teachers have become true believers. Between 88 and 96 per

cent of teachers believe they can diagnose a hyperactive child. And

three-fourths feel that they have an obligation to recommend that a doctor be

informed "

- The Myth of the Hyperactive Child p 84

" Teachers who no longer know how to teach claim the children are defective. "

- Psychiatry: The Ultimate Betrayal p283

 

 

Other teachers benefiting from the new epidemic are the " ADD " teachers. Any

doubts about Orwell's accuracy about the future will soon be erased if one takes

the time to research the bizarre and experimental " teaching methods " which have

had to be invented so quickly to handle the new " epidemic. "

 

Larry Brown, MD is not letting anyone off the hook. He describes the widespread

use of Ritalin as a " low point in professional ethics. "

 

 

" Where drugs are used as a cheap alternative to reform of the schools, then the

practice of drugging children must be seen as a political act. "

 

" drugging children...represents an ominous step along the Orwellian continuum of

social control through psychotechnology. " - Toxic Psychiatry pp. 313, 293.

 

Orwell and Huxley, are cited over and over by doctors who criticize the new

psychiatry.

 

Fourth, the school counselors, some of whom may only have undergrad degrees in

social work or psychology, but few of whom have medical credentials. For them

ADD may be a dream come true. School psychologists have suddenly been raised to

the level of a psychiatrist. Everyone can diagnose!

 

In 1950, there were only about 1000 psychologists in American schools. When ADD

was invented in 1980, there were about 10,000. By 1990 there were over 22,000

psychologists in American schools! (Thomas Fagan, PhD Memphis State University)

 

Fifth, the schools. A school evaluation to determine eligibility for Special Ed

costs $1270. If an estimated 5 million cases are supposedly out there, that's $6

billion for the schools. Hundreds of " learning programs, " tests, and materials

have been designed for ADD. It is a growth industry. It must be real! Special

Education programs ballooned from $1 billion in 1977 to $30 billion in 1994!

(U.S. News and World Report, 13 Dec 93) Ever wonder where all these

" handicapped " kids appeared from, suddenly in the 80s? Or all those parking

spaces? The Age of the Professional Victim.

 

Sixth, the parents. Parents benefit in several ways from the creation of ADD.

The underlying causes of unruly children today are not difficult to discover. By

the time he is in the 8th grade, the average kid has seen some 8,000 murders on

TV. Children's diets are extremely sensitizing and allergenic, with the emphasis

on sugar and dairy. Single parents, absent parents, drugged parents abound in

our society. Too often no one's driving the bus at home. Unrestricted TV intake

is not a substitute for raising a child. For all these reasons, unruly,

disturbed kids are a natural consequence. Ultimately the responsibility lies

with parents, and they are failing. Sure they have excuses; parents have

problems of their own. So here comes this brand new " disease " which will again

take the blame off the parents, because " my child has a disorder. "

 

 

" for the parents, the payoff comes in the alleviation of guilt "

- The Myth of the Hyperactive Child p65

 

And the best news is, he can be drugged into submission! Next problem. But the

difficulty wasn't really resolved; it was just shelved, put on hold, incubated.

Know what they say about payback.

 

Finally, the " patient. " Once a child has been diagnosed ADD, the pressure's off.

He's told he has a disability, and is put into a category of students who are no

longer expected to perform. Adapting to expectation, he slacks off, having found

the excuse he needed to glide along without working to his capacity. He makes

his contribution to the above chart on SAT performance. Many children have

calmed down with just the label ADD. And a sugar pill they thought was Ritalin.

Academic standards are lowered; glib and trendy pop psychology excuses are made.

With a snap of the fingers suddenly everything's all set. Few things are as

permanent as a temporary solution.

 

Other benefits for the ADD child are more time allotted to take SATs, as well as

entry tests for med school and law school. Eligibility for many state and

federal disability programs is on the rise. For an already confused adolescent,

ADD certainly has its compensations.

 

HOW DOES RITALIN FIT IN?

 

Ritalin (methylphenidate) is an amphetamine made by Ciba-Geigy which today

accounts for about 90% of medication provided to ADD " patients. "

 

Ritalin is an addictive drug, classed by the DEA as a Schedule II controlled

substance, same as narcotics like heroin, morphine and cocaine. Ritalin is also

as an illegal street drug where a profit of about $400 can be made from an

average Rx. It can be crushed up and snorted, or else mixed with heroin to

enhance a junkie's high. The U.S. uses 90% of the world's Ritalin, and Canada

most of the remaining 10%.

 

Underscoring the political controls in play here, Ritalin is a peculiarly

American drug, as shown in this chart from the United Nations:

 

 

Figure VI. Consumption of methylphenidate, in defined daily doses,

United States of America and all other countries, 1986-1994

 

 

 

 

 

source: REPORT OF THE INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL BOARD

 

 

 

The theory is that kids are so hyperactive, give them speed and they'll be

normal - the famous and unproven Paradoxical Effect. The reality is, long-term

effects of Ritalin given to children have never been studied, according to the

1995 PDR. No known biochemical imbalance in these children has ever been proven.

 

As far as learning disability is concerned, Ritalin has never been shown to

improve it even slightly. (Armstrong p.47) Moreover there is absolutely no

evidence to show that the emotional stability of adult life can be promoted or

even influenced by childhood experience with Ritalin. (A Dose of Sanity, p141)

 

Childhood use of Ritalin does show a high correlation with adolescent abuse of

street drugs - an easy transition. Ritalin brings with it the psychotic

tendencies which can be brought on by the advanced drugs, like heroin, cocaine,

and speed.

 

SIDE EFFECTS

 

In light of the immense social and economic forces promoting explosive market

growth of this wonder drug, it wouldn't be so bad if it were harmless.

Unfortunately most parents don't know about the PDR. The Physicians Desk

Reference is an annual publication by the drug companies which is a general

catalogue of all drugs sold in the U.S., their effects, recommended dosages, and

adverse effects. The PDR is a legal protection for the pharmaceutical industry

more than anything else; it is fair warning about side effects of drugs: 3200

pages of CYA. But parents are rarely told what it says. Here are some of the

side effects the 1996 PDR 42nd edition lists for Ritalin:

 

 

 

nervousness

skin rash

seizures

decreased growth

nausea Tourette's syndrome

insomnia

nausea

glaucoma

gastric pain

weight loss

emotional imbalance

headache

visual problems

suicidal

dizziness

irregular heart

tardive dyskinesia

fatigue

visual problems

decreased appetite

moodiness

high blood pressure

 

Outside of that, it should be fine.

 

Tourette's syndrome is a condition characterized by inappropriate, sometimes

obscene vocal outbursts, and unpredictable and strange physical movements.

(Sounds like Congress.) It may be long term.

 

Tardive dyskinesia is a permanent condition characterized by involuntary facial

tics, jerky movements of the head and arms; in short, a movement disorder that

can involve any of the voluntary muscles of the body.

 

Some studies have found brain pathology in the form of tissue shrinkage in more

than half the subjects taking Ritalin. Ritalin has also caused cancer in lab

animals. FDA's response? " People are not mice. " - Detroit News 13 Jan 96

 

The emotional problems listed from Ritalin use may include:

 

drug-induced neurosis

psychosis

addiction

clinical depression

In addition, the most stupid finding of all may be that long term Ritalin use

can actually cause the very conditions it is supposed to cure: inattention,

hyperactivity, and impulsivity! Hello! Anybody out there?

 

The PDR specifically states that Ritalin should not be used for children under

6. Nevertheless American psychiatrists ignore Ciba's own warning and prescribe

Ritalin for some 200,000 pre-school children! A study in the Feb. 2000 Journal

of the American Medical Association reveals that there has been a 10-fold

increase in SSRIs (Ritalin and Prozac) in children younger than 5 years old,

between 1993 and 1997! (Coyle) What are we doing?

 

Many doctors, like Carl Kline, MD, see no need for Ritalin at all:

 

" It is my belief that if these drugs were outlawed, children would not be at all

deprived of essential medication, but that doctors would be forced to make more

accurate diagnoses and seek better means of handling the hyperactive behavior of

a certain small percentage of their little patients.

SUICIDAL SHRIMPS?

 

Probably the most detrimental of all Ritalin's side effects are decreased growth

and suicidal tendencies. During childhood, all the systems of the body are under

the control of growth hormone for their normal development. The organs of the

body have not reached their full size and strength. Ritalin interferes with

growth hormone. Permanent organic and skeletal deficits are likely to result

even after Ritalin is discontinued. Remember, no long-term studies of this

drug's lasting side effects have ever been done. Are parents routinely informed

about all these possible side effects before the doctor writes the preion? What

do you think? Do you think this information might be helpful to a parent making

a decision?

 

The chance for suicidal tendencies - is that something for which to put your

child at risk just because he has a lot of energy? Kurt Cobain was a Ritalin

patient as a teenager. No long-term statistical studies have ever been done on

suicide resulting from Ritalin use, or from Prozac, for that matter. Yet all

doctors and Ciba will admit that for the 20 million Americans on these two

drugs, suicide is a possible result. Individual stories number in the thousands,

but who is keeping track? No one wants to rock the boat. - too many political

interests are in place, too much money changing hands.

 

ROLL AWAY THE STONE

 

" ..they come off drugs at 14 or so and suddenly they're big, strong people

who've never had to spend any time building any controls in learning how to cope

with their own daily stress. Then the parents who have forgotten what the

child's real personality was like without the mask of the drug, panic and say

'Help me. I don't know what to do with him.' ... they can only deal with the

medicated child. '

Schrag, p 94

Of course childhood and adolescence are confusing periods of growth - there's no

dress rehearsal. First time through's a take. But what we're doing with these

psychotropic drugs is erasing footage that can never be replaced. Each lost

stressful experience was an opportunity for growth and learning that was drugged

out of existence, stolen from the child forever. High and lows are clipped;

elation and depression are merged together as one, and the victim cruises

through his formative years an insensate robot.

 

CLINTON'S PLAN

 

In the aftermath of so many school shootings, the White House convened its

Conference on Mental Health in June of 1999. Bill and Hillary and Al and Tipper

brought their staggering collective intellect together to try and figure out

what to do about the embarassing pattern of murder that's gaining momentum in

schools across the nation. Their brilliant answer: more drugs. Forget that the

majority of the young shooters were already on Ritalin or other similar drugs.

(Reclaiming Our Children, p17) On p. 6 of Psychiatry and the Creation of

Senseless Violence, Wiseman lists 20 of the most visible murders in the past few

years that have involved Ritalin or its analogues.

 

Dr. Breggin explains how this conference was a massive PR compaign, funded and

orchestrated by the drug companies, to further promote the administration of the

same drugs that were involved in these children's shootings. The big difference

was that now, $61 million of taxpayer money is going to be spent on " research "

for more Ritalin-like drugs. This is a great coup for Ciba-Geigy; in the past,

drug companies had to fund their own research for new drugs.

 

The point is, more drugs are obviously not the answer. On p. 46 of Reclaiming

Our Children, Dr. Breggin lists the major child shootings that have occurred

since 1996, and then shows which drugs were involved with which. After the book

went to print, several other spectacular shootings have occurred, including the

one where a six-year-old boy shot a six-year-old girl. Listing these shootings

is not as important as recognizing that by introducing these unproven

psychotropic drugs and legislating them into our children's bloodstreams on a

mass scale, we have created a new pattern of human behavior, unprecedented in

history: children killing children.

 

Breggin cites the Washington Post article that chronicles child and teenage

killings for 1996, the most recent year for which stats are available. " In 1996,

4,643 children and teenagers were killed with guns - 2,866 murdered.. " (Breggin,

p 62)

 

That's a lot of Littletons. We don't hear about most of them. Will Clinton and

Gore's program of more drugs solve the problem? More drugs will cause more

killings - it's not rocket science. Rather, it's

 

JUNK SCIENCE

 

The Clinton Sideshow has enlisted its own " expert " to give their version of

scientific validity to this grand design to increase the drugging of children.

Dr. Harold Koplewicz, a child psychiatrist, was dragged out of the woodwork to

assuage the guilt of parents, and to wash their hands of all responsibility for

their children's " diseased brains. " (Reclaiming Our Children, p 22) To this end,

Koplewicz made up the Orwellian slogan " no-fault brain disease, " signalling to

the parents that nothing they have done is the cause of the child's " disorder. "

It's all " genetics. " Not the diet, not the lack of exercise, not the

inattention, not the broken homes, not the MTV, not the sugar addiction, not the

moral bankruptcy, not the absence of family values... None of this matters.

 

The next step is to fabricate " scientific " studies to prove that ADD, originally

created in committee by the APA in 1980 with no research or proof, to will that

'scientific' validation now into existence, by sheer economic force. And the

worst feature of all is that administration of the drugs is going to be

involuntary. It's coming - just watch.

 

ORWELL AND HUXLEY

 

The darkest aspect of the whole ADD scam, in my opinion is the totalitarian

leveling effect that is being perpetrated on American children and docilely

accepted by American adults. Children may still be able to function and to

attend classes on Ritalin. But any teacher or parent will attest that creativity

is usually gone. The light in their eyes goes out. Children develop at different

rates, with varying degrees of stress and the ability to cope with it. As Dr.

Walker says, stress and confusion are a necessary part of adolescence, essential

to the learning process. To mute these normal emotions of frustration and

elation with drugs is to steal these kids' childhood and adolescence from them.

 

Huxley's prevision accuracy is scary: in Brave New World the Ritalin of the

future is a drug called soma. Soma sees to it that " no one is ever sad or

angry. " An entire branch of the government is reserved for " Emotional

Conditioning " and another for " Malthusian Engineering. " Extraordinary that

nearly 70 years ago this author predicted the trend toward government assuming

the regulation of its citizens' emotions. In many school districts where the

parents or the child has resisted the administration of Ritalin, the authorities

have actually taken custody of the student and forced this dangerous

experimental drug to be administered.

 

At least the World Controllers in Brave New World, even though they knew what

they were doing, had a convincingly paternal explanation about taking away

people's freedom to experience life as being " for their own good. " Today this

pretense is not even bothered with. Our totalitarian victimization of

unsuspecting children is pure politics and economics. The science is so thin as

to be ludicrous, behind both ADD and Ritalin. There is nothing scientific about

modern bio-psychiatry; and there is certainly nothing scientific about Ritalin.

 

Laws are being passed making " psychiatric care " (read 'drugs') to be required

whenever possible: public schools, the Medicare system, welfare, mental

institutions - anywhere the state can legally intrude into the life and mind of

the individual. This is not Orwellian paranoia; it's happening every day.

 

REAL MENTAL PROBLEMS

 

Now I do not want to give the impression that no children have mental disorders

which require treatment. It's obvious enough that children today can be under

extreme duress, from dietary influences, from dysfunctional home life, from

drugs, from dysfunctional school life, from MTV, or any TV, and from several

dozen underlying physical conditions, many of which may manifest as mental

disorders. Don't miss the point here. Of course there are some troubled kids out

there today who need professional help. But that help is not a 15-minute

interview and diagnosis whose purpose is to feed another passenger onto a

self-serving, political freight train, rolling down the tracks out of control,

trying to legislate more power, more money to the furtherance of its own

economic momentum. Is this your child? What do you think his problem stems from?

What do you gain from a shotgun diagnosis? Peace of mind? Exemption from

responsibility? Group acceptance? Sympathy? What about the kid and his future?

Have you informed yourself about Ritalin? What if you're just covering up some

serious underlying pathology in favor of the quick fix, something that's going

to smolder, to incubate, to develop, undiagnosed? Does the child get enough

exercise? Does he ever get any exercise? Sugar and dairy? Do you know that such

foods are sensitizing allergens which may provide the entire biochemical

explanation for chronic misbehavior? What about discipline? Wild horses run

wild. Calling someone ADD doesn't really solve anything, unless you belong to

one of the above benefiting groups. But long-term, everyone loses, except the

drug companies.

 

NATURAL SOLUTIONS

 

Alternative (non-drug) cures for the student with " too much energy " abound. They

work because they don't approach the problem from a primarily political point of

view. Alternative methods focus on resolution of the problem; rather than

finding excuses to prolong it, for ancillary and ulterior agendas. For

hyperactivity, the most commonly effective holistic approach would be

 

1. water. Most kids are dehydrated, from the body having to deal with the

gallons of soft drinks and dairy drinks the kids consume, as well as the copious

tonnage of salty snackfoods and junkfood that are so prevalent. Replace soft

drinks with 1-2 liters of water per day, and watch the chemical imbalances

vaporize. (The Body's Many Cries for Water) Sounds simple, but it's definitely

not easy.

 

2. diet: eliminate the sensitizing allergens: milk, cheese, ice cream, white

sugar, white flour. soft drinks. These are non-foods; virtually devoid of

nutritive value, empty, devitalizing 'foods of commerce.' (See the chapter on

Allergies) In the body they have druglike, antigenic effects, and destroy the

normal brain chemistry. Simontacci's new book well documents the chemical

disruption of neurotransmitters by food and drugs: The Crazy Makers. So all this

is not a theory. Try the 60-day test. No change, keep going.

 

3. exercise. According to the National Institutes of Health, only 4% of

Americans exercise. Often physical education programs are the first to be

trimmed by budget cutbacks. Many excuses, but children need an hour of vigorous

exercise every day, especially if they are being criticized for something as

ill-defined as hyperactivity. Their musculoskeletal systems are developing

rapidly. Such growth is inhibited by inactivity, i.e., 'normal' behavior, like

sitting immobile at a desk for eight hours. Try the 60-day test. The word is

vigorous.

 

4. gross nerve blockage. Upper neck trauma from falls and accidents, or even

from childbirth, may go uncorrected for years. Thousands of cases of " ADD, " as

well as learning disorders, have probably been resolved employing this simple

biomechanical corrective approach: spinal adjustment. Documentation? DCs rarely

document anything.

 

5. A natural herbal remedy called Restores claims consistent success with

hyperactives via neurotransmitter normalization. Moderate doses of the amino

acid phenylalanine, available in any health food store, have also shown

promising results with hyperactivity.

 

6. Simply getting the kid away from TV for a few months may have profound

results. It's not enough that television is a medium which caters to the lowest

possible common denominator of intelligence, and that its primary purpose is not

entertainment or information, but control. All that is a given. What is much

more subtle is the assiduous effect of having no image remain on the screen for

more than three seconds. Except for MTV, when it's much less than a second. This

type of incessant hypnotic bombardment of the watcher's psyche imprints an

insidiously superficial view of the world. The child gets no opportunity to

concentrate, to focus. The illusion is: I saw it on TV, now I understand it.

Complex issues are reduced to flashes of data - wrapped in that homogenized,

canny, controlled little format. No need to do further research or actually read

something on a topic. Oh yeah, I know all about that: it was on TV. The idea of

the thorough, in-depth study of a subject - this becomes an

alien concept.

 

Attention deficit? As Dennis Miller said, Americans today have the attention

span of a ferret on a double expresso. Your kid has ADD? Throw the TV out the

window, and check back in 90 days.

 

7. Lastly, if all the above actually have been tried and have met with no

success, the child might be evaluated by a traditional, slow-to-drug

psychiatrist who would first of all go through the painstaking process of ruling

out underlying physical causes. The doctor might then actually run standardized

psychiatric test batteries, which are taught in the psychiatric curriculum, even

including psychoanalysis (shudder! how very retro!). Happy dinosaur hunting.

 

WHAT ABOUT THE FUTURE?

 

In the long run, delaying normal adolescent development with Ritalin and the ADD

diagnosis do not serve the child. Nobel laureate Dr. Alexis Carrel in 1939 saw

the notable disadvantages of the unchallenged child:

 

" Irresponsible also is the youth brought up in modern schools by teachers

ignorant of the necessity for effort, for intellectual concentration, for moral

discipline. Later on in life, when these young men and women encounter the

indifference of the world, the material and mental difficulties of existence,

they are incapable of adaptation, save by asking for relief for protection, for

doles, and if relief can not thus be obtained, by crime. "

- Man, The Unknown p146

The ideas presented in this chapter only scratch the surface of what is really

going on in the field of psychiatry, pharmacology, and the politics of ADD. The

reality of the situation is probably much worse than I have hinted at. I urge

the reader to use this chapter as a starting point for further investigation,

beginning with the attached references, especially if there are children

involved who have been diagnosed ADD. Remember, the best scientific data

indicates that there is no such thing. But no such equivocation exists for the

side effects of the psychotropics: they're quite real.

 

The point of view put forth in this chapter is expressed by perhaps 1% of what

is being written and published on the topic of ADD today. But in the words of

George Orwell, " sanity is not statistical. " Our children are the future. To

allow them to be victimized for economic and political gain, supported only by

some very shaky pseudo-science drug-funded studies, erodes the fabric of society

by subtly and gradually surrendering the constitutional rights of the

individual. The state should not tell you what degree of " hyperactivity " or

energy is acceptable in your child. That is personal. That is individual. That's

your business. That's over the line. We never granted them that right. There's

no medical, scientific, or legal basis for it. But they're doing it because

we're letting them. If the doctors and the drug empires and the social servants

need another disease to make a few more trillion dollars from, let them figure

out how to cure the diseases we've already got, instead of

trying to pretend that nonconformity is a medical condition.

 

Living things mature at different rates, even within the same species. That's a

law of nature, not something that needs to be " treated. " Plant a dozen trees in

the same soil. After a year are you going to ask yourself what's wrong with the

shorter ones? Or the thinner ones? Or the taller ones? What would you know about

the way this tree should grow to maturity? How about trusting in its own inner

wisdom? Living things are not like PC boards in an assembly line. There's a lot

of room for normal variation. Eccentricity does not require medical treatment.

 

Most creative people are eccentric in some way: Bill Gates, Einstein, Audrey

Hepburn, Linus Pauling, John Lennon, Mozart, Elton John, Michelangelo, Picasso,

Nikola Tesla, Benjamin Franklin, Edward Van Halen, Alexander Dumas, BJ Palmer,

Sam Kinison, Jo Stafford, A.P. Hill, Gandhi, Joel and Ethan Coen, Tony Robbins,

Galileo, Gianni Versace, Ayn Rand, etc. What if some teacher had diagnosed these

people ADD and put them on Ritalin? What would have been lost?

 

This chapter has been the sketchiest of overviews whose purpose has been to

point the reader in the direction of further study, and to plant a seed of

doubt, that the overwhelming majority of the conventional wisdom about ADD may

be false, unsubstantiated, unscientific, malevolent, and motivated primarily by

political and economic agenda. " Experts " will tell you this chapter is wrong,

but aren't they the ones making their livelihood by drugging your child? You

don't need them; I've included a list of experts that you can use to make up

your own mind. That is, if you're still the one who does that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

www.thedoctorwithin.com

--

_________________

 

JoAnn Guest

mrsjoguest

DietaryTipsForHBP

http://www.geocities.com/mrsjoguest

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The complete " Whole Body " Health line consists of the " AIM GARDEN TRIO "

Ask About Health Professional Support Series: AIM Barleygreen

 

" Wisdom of the Past, Food of the Future "

 

http://www.geocities.com/mrsjoguest/AIM.html

 

PLEASE READ THIS IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER

We have made every effort to ensure that the information included in these pages

is accurate. However, we make no guarantees nor can we assume any responsibility

for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, product, or

process discussed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Search - Find what you’re looking for faster.