Does ADHD Even Exist? The Ritalin Sham

[Guest guest]

With all the talk of homeschooling, very active kids and the public

school system pushing drugs on the kids, I thought this article might

be of interest.

 

~A

 

Does ADHD Even Exist? The Ritalin Sham

by John Breeding, Ph.D.

Alice, the mother of a seven-year-old son, Nathan, recently visited

my office for a counseling session. Nathan had reportedly been

different and difficult from the beginning: exhibiting early seizure-

like activity, a most challenging temperament, great sensitivity to

various types of stimulation, intense frustration, aggressive

tantrums, and other apparent developmental difficulties. Alice had

taken him to doctors from a young age, obtaining a variety of mostly

nonspecific diagnoses of developmental problems. Alice felt

unappreciated as a parent, hurt and angry that the Montessori school

her son had attended at ages four and five had ultimately rejected

him. She felt judged by other parents, whom she felt blamed her for

her son's challenging behavior. And she felt unsupported by both

camps of opinion regarding " medication " : the pro-Ritalin forces

challenged her reluctance to use the drug for her son, and the

antidrug group vehemently urged her to resist drug use.

Alice's personal stance on the Ritalin issue was clear. While she

basically agreed that these " medications " are not good for children,

she also felt that, in her family's case, it had been helpful. Nathan

had been diagnosed at age five with attention deficit hyperactivity

disorder (ADHD), and had taken Ritalin for a year. Alice thought the

drug greatly helped her son, slowing him down enough so that he could

listen and process information. She and her boyfriend both felt drugs

made the boy much easier to be with; further, their own reduced

stress eased them so much that they were now able to consider other

alternatives for Nathan, such as nutritional supplementation.

Proponents of psychiatric drugs attest that they " work, " meaning they

alter mood, thought, and action. They also " work, " of course, in that

they assuage the medical community's expectation that drugs be used

to " treat " these children. I believe that fully informed adults

should have every right to voluntarily use any drugs they wish, as

long as they don't endanger others in doing so. Children, however,

are not able to give fully informed consent to drug use - especially

those under six years of age, a group in whom we are witnessing a

dramatic increase in psychiatric drug prescription.1 It is,

therefore, our responsibility as adults to ensure every possible

opportunity for optimal development for our children, to protect and

defend our children from powerful toxic drugs, particularly those

prescribed for psychiatric purposes.

Like Alice, a large percentage of adults who take psychiatric drugs

or give them to their children would prefer to avoid them - and yet

they capitulate and use them because the drugs provide relief: from

tension, fear, and desperation, as well as from the external strains

of judgment and coercion. Lawrence Diller, author of the best-selling

book Running on Ritalin, argues that: " The 700 percent rise in

Ritalin use is our canary in the mineshaft for the middle class,

warning us that we aren't meeting the needs of all our children, not

just those with ADD. It's time we rethought our priorities and

expectations unless we want a nation of kids running on Ritalin. " 2

Dr. Diller decries the trend (as I do in my book The Wildest Colts

Make the Best Horses), contending that this increased reliance on

drugs reflects a society in distress. Rather than try to force our

children to shrink into situations that do not meet their needs, he

states, we need to take responsibility for our society.

Diller himself is, however, torn by the same conflict many parents

have concerning Ritalin. On the one hand, he says: " As a citizen I

must speak out about the social conditions that create the living

imbalance. Otherwise I am complicitous with forces and values that I

believe are bad for children. " On the other hand, though, he

concludes: " As a physician, after assessing the child, his family and

school situation, I keep prescribing Ritalin. My job is to ease

suffering and Ritalin will help round- and octagonal-peg kids fit

into rather rigid square educational holes. " 3

This seemingly contradictory stance is the same one Alice and

millions of other parents face. It's not as if all parents readily

accept the prescription of Ritalin. Alice, in fact, incurred the

wrath of her son's neurologist because she refused to give her son

Adderall, a combination of three different amphetamine-like

stimulants often used as an alternative to Ritalin. Increasingly over

the past ten years or so, millions of parents are nagged by their

children's physicians: " If your child had diabetes, " the doctors

taunt, for example, " you'd give him insulin, wouldn't you? "

" What could I say to that? " Alice asked me. Her question was not so

much a call for information as it was a need to express her

hopelessness. It was encouraging to me that she was angry, for anger

is a great antidote to hopelessness. She was mad about the treatment

she had received from prior medical and mental health professionals,

as well as the lack of support from two opposing drug camps. Before I

would hazard a possible response for that neurologist, Alice and I

talked about the feelings of relief, guilt, and anger the Ritalin

issue had caused for her family. Finally, I gave her what would have

been my response: the diagnosis of ADHD is, itself, fraudulent.

ADHD: Nothing but a Sham

A condition such as diabetes carries detectable physical evidence of

disease - abnormal blood sugar levels, evidence of pancreatic

malfunction - justifying medical treatment. Families confronted with

the " wouldn't you give insulin " argument could begin by asking the

neurologist to provide medical evidence that a disease requiring

treatment exists. Between 1993 and 1997, neurologist Fred Baughman

corresponded repeatedly with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA),

the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), Ciba-Geigy (now Novartis,

manufacturers of Ritalin), and top ADHD researchers around the

country - including the National Institute of Mental Health - asking

them to show him any article(s) in the peer-reviewed scientific

literature constituting proof of a physical or chemical abnormality

in ADHD and thereby qualifying it as a disease or a medical syndrome.

Through sheer determination and persistence, Dr. Baughman eventually

got these entities to admit that no objective validation of the

diagnosis of ADHD exists.4

Prescribing Ritalin for something that is not a " disease " does not,

in my estimation, constitute a legitimate practice of medicine. If

ADHD is not a disease, treating it medically constitutes a fraud. Yet

many physicians are true believers in medically treating " mental

illness, " despite the consistent lack of scientific evidence

of " mental illness " as a " disease. " 5 Herein lies the conflict for

parents like Alice.

The Significance of Oppression Theory

Victims of oppression are not only blamed for their condition, and

usually thought to be deserving of their inferior position, they are

eventually conditioned to accept it as their reality. As the great

American writer James Baldwin stated: " It's not the world that was my

oppressor, because what the world does to you, if the world does it

to you long enough and effectively enough, you begin to do it to

yourself. " 6 In what may be the ultimate power play, a victim is, over

time, conditioned to internalize, accept, and ultimately, forget

about the very fact that they are oppressed.

There are two specific forms of oppression that are pertinent to the

discussion of psychiatric drug use for children. The first is

adultism - the systematic mistreatment of young people by adults

simply because they are young. Like other forms of oppression,

adultism is self-perpetuating: when we are treated poorly as

children, we internalize the idea and feelings that life is unfair;

that rank and power should be used for personal advantage; and that

we are somehow unworthy of respect, incapable of clear thinking, and

unable to become our own authority.

The second form of oppression is what I call psychiatric oppression:

the systematic mistreatment of people labeled as " mentally ill " -

including children diagnosed with fictitious illnesses such as ADHD.

Institutionalized in our society, psychiatry is also guided by a

worldview that embraces biopsychiatry.7 Juxtaposed with adultism,

psychiatric diagnosis and treatment enforce the message that an " ADHD

child " is inadequate, defective, unworthy of complete respect, and in

need of drugs to control and cope with the effects of his or

her " illness. "

Lies My Doctor Told Me

What exactly does it mean to " help round- and octagonal-peg kids fit

into rather rigid square educational holes? " I believe there are at

least six fallacies that underlie the rampant prescription of drugs

like Ritalin to our children.

1. " Social adjustment is good. "

While the ability to adjust socially may be important, it is not

always a " good " thing. In its most extreme form, social adjustment

leads to conformity and compliance, which has resulted in dire social

phenomena, including slavery and genocide. This seems a particularly

aberrant notion in a society like ours, which is so deeply grounded

in the quest for individualism, free speech and association, and

the " pursuit of happiness. "

2. " Children must learn to conform. "

When a child fails to adjust to school, we should at the very least

think about our abilities to consider the child's needs. It is

certainly important for children to learn how to get along in various

situations, and how to avoid drawing sanction upon themselves.

Nevertheless, young children must be enabled to express their unique

gifts within their communities. It is a mistake to force our children

to fit molds imposed upon them according to the needs and conventions

of the adult order.

3. " Failed social adjustment causes suffering. "

In our competitive culture, we tend to view mistakes as negatives to

be avoided. It is hard to accept the notion that mistakes can be

good, and actually, in fact, are the way we learn. We are obsessed

with the notions of success and failure. We judge a child's actions

as success or failure according to our expectations and demands, not

through the eyes of a developing child. Eventually, the child

internalizes both the standard and the evaluation: " I failed to live

up to the expectations, therefore I am a failure. " I would argue that

it is not failure that causes suffering, but rather it is oppression -

in the form of adultism - which imposes arbitrary standards, and an

adult shame-based worldview. This is what causes children to feel and

think of themselves as failures, and therein lies their suffering.

4. " A physician's job is to ease suffering. "

Certainly it is - through the practice of medicine that incorporates

compassion - not labeling, coercion, or guilt.

5. " Ritalin helps children conform. "

Not always. Sometimes it makes them " psychotic, " sometimes it makes

them aggressive. Other times Ritalin makes children anxious or

nauseous. It can make some children feel suicidal. And for some

children, Ritalin has been a deadly prescription. 8 When it " works "

well, the child is observed to produce better in the classroom. This,

the research shows us, is the only positive short-term outcome. There

are no positive long-term effects in any aspect of child functioning -

social, behavioral, or academic - associated with the use of

Ritalin.9

6. " Therefore, giving your child Ritalin lets me ease her suffering. "

In an 1854 speech on the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Abraham Lincoln

said, " I would consent to any great evil, to avoid an even greater

one. " 10 Many parents feel the compulsion to punish or discipline

their child in hopes that even greater misfortune might not befall

them. Given the reality of today's oppressive society, and its lack

of resolve to truly meet the needs of our children, the argument

goes, Ritalin may seem a better choice than continued pressure,

disapproval, and sanction.

This " ease the suffering " argument reveals one of the most consistent

justifications for the use of psychiatric drugs for children: on one

level or another, Ritalin absolves each person of his or her

responsibility. The child is not responsible, he's " sick. " Parents,

doctors, the community, the medical and educational institutions -

the society at large - are relieved of their duty to meet the real

needs of that child. We prescribe drugs; the child conforms; the

educational and medical institutions don't have to change; and our

standards of " normalcy " are passed on to the next generation of drug-

assisted children learning to fit into the mandated square hole. We

have endless justifications that allow us to conform to oppression

with a seemingly clear conscience, while an estimated 5,000,000

children are on methylphenidate, and another 3,000,000 on other toxic

drugs - given to them by adults who care for them. Some may call

this " medicine, " but a growing group of parents and others are

beginning to see it as institutionalized child abuse.

Suffer the Children?

Although ADHD does not exist as a real disease, it is a very real

label imposed on children, with very real consequences for the child.

On a physical level, the recommended drugs are toxic, and they have a

long list of deleterious effects.1

Regarding Ritalin, the fact is that " methylphenidate looks like an

amphetamine (chemically), acts like an amphetamine (effects), and is

abused like an amphetamine (recreational use, Emergency Room visits,

pharmacy break-ins). " 2 (parentheses mine)

On a psychological level, Ritalin produces two especially harmful

effects. It deprives a child of the right to develop a character and

a way of living with self and world, in a drug-free state. Ritalin

also creates a burden of shame, a conviction that a child who is on

this drug is somehow defective, unworthy, and neither lovable nor

even acceptable in his or her " natural " state.

These stimulant drugs for children truly are about enforcement of our

culture's preeminent value: productivity.3 Amphetamines, as we have

learned over the course of the past century, increase output. But of

course, with amphetamines, the trajectory is usually crash and burn.

In the US, millions of adults, and an alarmingly increasing number of

children, take psychiatric stimulants like Prozac to " keep going and

going. " Similarly, we give children as young as two years of age

stimulant drugs to help their " impaired " productivity. But wherein

lies the suffering, in the " failure " to produce or achieve, or in the

so-called remedy we prescribe?

1 Peter Breggin, Talking Back to Ritalin (Monroe, Maine: Common

Courage Press, 1998).

2 Mary Eberstadt, " Why Ritalin Rules, " Policy Review 94 (1999): 24-44.

3 See John Breeding's new e-book, The Necessity of Madness and

Unproductivity: Psychiatric Oppression or Human Transformation?

(Online Originals, 2000), for an explanation of how psychiatry acts

to enforce our social mandate of relentless productivity. (Available

at www.onlineoriginals.com.)

 

Ritalin Use - Simply Out of Control

Psychiatric drug use by children in US schools is turning into an

enormous problem. In 1970, an estimated 150,000 US children were

taking Ritalin. By 1980, the estimates were between 270,000 and

541,000 - double the numbers of a decade before. By 1990, the numbers

doubled again; close to 900,000 children were on Ritalin. The Drug

Enforcement Agency (DEA) estimates there was a 700 percent increase

in the production of Ritalin between 1990 and 1997, 90 percent of

which was consumed in the US.

Based on the available data, a realistic estimate of the number of

school-age children on Ritalin today in the US is 5 million.

Considering that Ritalin - like other amphetamines, a Schedule II

controlled substance that carries a significant risk of abuse -

represents 70 percent of the total prescriptions for amphetamine-like

drugs, it is reasonable to estimate that over 7 million US

schoolchildren are on some sort of stimulant drug. We can add close

to 2 million children now on so-called antidepressants, so it appears

that over 8 million children in this country are on psychiatric drugs

today. According to census data from 1999, the US population for ages

six to 18 is just under 51.5 million, meaning approximately 15

percent of our schoolchildren are on psychiatric drugs. In many

schools and districts, the estimations are quite higher, as much as

20 or 40 percent. A study reported this year in the Journal of the

American Medical Association revealed that Ritalin prescriptions for

two to four year olds increased 200 to 300 percent between 1991 and

1995.1

In an era when we are constantly told to protect our children from

drug abuse, it seems there are some very disturbing exceptions to the

rule.

1 Zito et al., " Trends in the Prescribing of Psychotropic Medications

to Preschoolers, " JAMA 283 (2000): 1025-1030.

 

Notes

1 J. M. Zito, D. J. Safer, S. dosReis, J. F. Gardner, M. Boles, and

F. Lynch, " Trends in the Prescribing of Psychotropic Medications to

Preschoolers, " JAMA 283 (2000): 1025-1030.

2 " A Nation of Kids on Ritalin, " an essay posted on Lawrence Diller's

website: www.docdiller.com.

3 Ibid.

4 See the website of neurologist Fred Baughman, MD, for information

on the ADHD fraud: home.att.net/~fred-alden.

5 See Peter Breggin's book Toxic Psychiatry (St. Martin's Press,

1991), or the journal Ethical Human Sciences and Services, for

evidence on the pseudoscience of biopsychiatry.

6 Conversation between James Baldwin and Nicki Giovanni, November 4,

1971, " A Dialogue, " cited in L. R. Frank, ed., Random House Webster's

Quotationary (New York: Random House, 1998).

7 See John Breeding's book The Wildest Colts Make the Best Horses

(Austin, Tex.: Bright Books, 1996) or his website,

www.wildestcolts.com, for a fuller exposition of the belief system of

biopsychiatry.

8 Dr. Fred Baughman is currently involved in three Ritalin death

cases. His essay " Who Killed Stephanie Hall? " , available on his

website (see Note 4), tells of one of these three and includes a

brief review of relevant cardiac literature. An article by Caroline

Kern in the Oakland Press, April 14, 2000, entitled " Prescription

Drug, Not Skateboard Accident, Killed Clawson Teen, " reports on the

most recent death in March of 14-year-old Matthew Smith of Clawson,

Michigan.

9 See Peter Breggin, Talking Back to Ritalin (Monroe, Maine: Common

Courage Press, 1998) or Lawrence Diller, Running on Ritalin (New

York: Bantam Doubleday Dell, 1998) for summaries of this research

evidence.

10 Abraham Lincoln, speech on the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Peoria,

Illinois, October 16, 1854. Cited in L. R. Frank, ed., Random House

Webster's Quotationary (New York: Random House, 1998).

This article is adapted from Dr. Breeding's website, " The Wildest

Colts Make the Best Horses " . It also appeared in Mothering, Issue

101, July/August 2000.

 

http://www.naturalchild.com/guest/john_breeding.html

[Guest guest]

The first step is to go and search the files on the Doc's thoughts about this. To stop the belief in the witch doctor who points the bone with a fancy abbreviation of what he believes reality to be will help your own perception a lot.My own first suggestion, would be to give the kid a very natural diet and stop feeding them all today's commercially brainwashing so called good for them foods.too many kids today have control over what they eat, I thought that's why they have parents. We are there to train them in all the good habits that they need and the one's they are to pass to the next generation.If that message is that twisties are used as a between meal snack then the apple will become a novelty as the generations progress.Too few kids today will first look for a piece of fruit as a snack, and the only reason for this is our own fault for not conditioning them to this type of lifestyle.Its easier to blame someone else than to accept responsibility.

If you make your own rules then you do rule your own world.

 

Tom

 

-

Wendy .

herbal remedies

Sunday, July 27, 2003 10:11 PM

[herbal remedies] Re: Does ADHD Even Exist? The Ritalin Sham

Actually on the topic of ADHD, does anyone know of good treatments for this "condition" besides EPA/DHA supplementation, food elimination etc?Wendy(Australia)_______________Hotmail is now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/signup.aspFederal Law requires that we warn you of the following: 1. Natural methods can sometimes backfire. 2. If you are pregnant, consult your physician before using any natural remedy. 3. The Constitution guarantees you the right to be your own physician and toprescribe for your own health. We are not medical doctors although MDs are welcome to post here as long as they behave themselves. Any opinions put forth by the list members are exactly that, and any person following the advice of anyone posting here does so at their own risk. It is up to you to educate yourself. By accepting advice or products from list members, you are agreeing to be fully responsible for your own health, and hold the List Owner and members free of any liability. Dr. Ian ShillingtonDoctor of NaturopathyDr.IanShillington