We would like to thank all of you for sending your Letters of Support on Senate Memorial 9 and the Petition to Abolish Suicide-Causing Anti-Depressants! Keep them coming; help us get Sarina's Voice heard! Visit the "SARINA'S LAW" page on our site to see the letters and stay up to date on the Legislature. This is a small step toward "Sarina's Law" and my ultimate goal is to abolish these killer drugs, but at least it shows that we are making a difference! We contacted Senator Carraro shortly after losing Sarina and he has been amazing at getting something into this session. Now we need everyone's support. I urge you to please send me your Letters of Support right away. If you'd like to expound and share personal experiences that is great. If you'd just like to send a quick note that's great too. Please address your letters to the "New Mexico State Senators" and voice your support of Senate Memorial 9 as Sarina's Voice Memorial Act. I'll be delivering them to each of the State Senators as well as the Petition signatures, so please be sure to sign the petition as well. Get everyone you know to sign it also. You can
link to all of this through my website at
COPES Foundation and email me at SarinasVoice@aol.com
Also speak to your Government about Legislature! You can make a
difference and get Sarina's Voice heard!
Monday, January 21, 2008
Saturday, January 19, 2008
School 1968 vs. 2008
The following scenarios and their likely outcomes by year were emailed to us by The International Coalition for Drug Awareness,
http://www.drugawareness.org/
I feel the outcomes are very familiar to many of us. We can relate and the trends are quite alarming.
Scenario: Johnny and Mark get into a fistfight after school.
1968 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up mates.
2008 - Police are called, SWAT team arrives, mobiles with video of fight confiscated as evidence. Johnny and Mark are charged with assault, AVOs are taken out and both are suspended even though it was Johnny who started it. Diversionary conferences and parent meetings conducted. The video is shown on 6 internet sites.
Scenario: Jeffrey won't sit still in class, disrupts other students.
1968 - Jeffrey is sent to the principal's office and given a good paddling. Returns to class, sits still and does not disrupt class again.
2008 - Jeffrey is given huge doses of Ritalin. Counseled to death, becomes a zombie and is tested for ADD. School gets extra funding because Jeffrey has special needs. Jeffrey drops out of school.
Scenario: Billy breaks a window in his neighbor's car and his Dad gives him a whipping with his belt.
1968 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college, and becomes a successful businessman.
2008 - Billy's dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy is removed to foster care and joins a gang and becomes a crack addict. Psychologist tells Billy's sister that surely she remembers being abused herself and their dad goes to prison. Billy's mum has an affair with the psychologist. Psychologist gets a promotion.
Scenario: Mark, a college student, brings joint to college.
1968 - Mark shares a smoke with the college principal.
2008 - Police are called and Mark is expelled from College for drug possession. His car and flat are searched for drugs and weapons. Given a fine and community service.
Scenario: Vijay fails high school English.
1968 - Vijay goes to Remedial English, passes and goes to college.
2008 - Vijay's cause is taken up by local human rights group. Newspaper articles appear nationally explaining that making English a requirement for graduation is racist. Civil Liberties Association files class action lawsuit against Department of Education and his English teacher. English is banned from core curriculum. Vijay is given his leaver's certificate anyway but ends up picking cabbages for a living because he cannot speak English.
Scenario: Johnny takes apart leftover fireworks, puts them in a model plane and blows up an anthill.
1968 - Ants die.
2008 - Anti terror squad are called and Johnny is charged with domestic Terrorism. Teams investigate parents, siblings are removed from the home, computers are confiscated, and Johnny's dad goes on a terror watch list and is never allowed to fly again.
Scenario: Johnny falls in the playground and scrapes his knee. His teacher, Mary, finds him crying, and gives him a hug to comfort him.
1968 - Johnny soon feels better and goes back to playing.
2008 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces three years in prison. Johnny undergoes five years of therapy, becomes gay.
http://www.drugawareness.org/
I feel the outcomes are very familiar to many of us. We can relate and the trends are quite alarming.
Scenario: Johnny and Mark get into a fistfight after school.
1968 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up mates.
2008 - Police are called, SWAT team arrives, mobiles with video of fight confiscated as evidence. Johnny and Mark are charged with assault, AVOs are taken out and both are suspended even though it was Johnny who started it. Diversionary conferences and parent meetings conducted. The video is shown on 6 internet sites.
Scenario: Jeffrey won't sit still in class, disrupts other students.
1968 - Jeffrey is sent to the principal's office and given a good paddling. Returns to class, sits still and does not disrupt class again.
2008 - Jeffrey is given huge doses of Ritalin. Counseled to death, becomes a zombie and is tested for ADD. School gets extra funding because Jeffrey has special needs. Jeffrey drops out of school.
Scenario: Billy breaks a window in his neighbor's car and his Dad gives him a whipping with his belt.
1968 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college, and becomes a successful businessman.
2008 - Billy's dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy is removed to foster care and joins a gang and becomes a crack addict. Psychologist tells Billy's sister that surely she remembers being abused herself and their dad goes to prison. Billy's mum has an affair with the psychologist. Psychologist gets a promotion.
Scenario: Mark, a college student, brings joint to college.
1968 - Mark shares a smoke with the college principal.
2008 - Police are called and Mark is expelled from College for drug possession. His car and flat are searched for drugs and weapons. Given a fine and community service.
Scenario: Vijay fails high school English.
1968 - Vijay goes to Remedial English, passes and goes to college.
2008 - Vijay's cause is taken up by local human rights group. Newspaper articles appear nationally explaining that making English a requirement for graduation is racist. Civil Liberties Association files class action lawsuit against Department of Education and his English teacher. English is banned from core curriculum. Vijay is given his leaver's certificate anyway but ends up picking cabbages for a living because he cannot speak English.
Scenario: Johnny takes apart leftover fireworks, puts them in a model plane and blows up an anthill.
1968 - Ants die.
2008 - Anti terror squad are called and Johnny is charged with domestic Terrorism. Teams investigate parents, siblings are removed from the home, computers are confiscated, and Johnny's dad goes on a terror watch list and is never allowed to fly again.
Scenario: Johnny falls in the playground and scrapes his knee. His teacher, Mary, finds him crying, and gives him a hug to comfort him.
1968 - Johnny soon feels better and goes back to playing.
2008 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces three years in prison. Johnny undergoes five years of therapy, becomes gay.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Attacks on Tom Cruise
From: terrylc
To: sarinasvoice@aol.com
Sent: 1/17/2008 7:36:32 P.M. Mountain Standard Time
Subj: The Attacks On Tom Cruise
The mass media is attacking Tom Cruise, again, this time over a Scientology recruitment video. See, for example, the hatchet job from liberal-when-it's-convenient-and-serves-our-corporate-masters Slate, http://www.slate.com/id/2182338?wpisrc=newsletter
Well here we go again: When you don't like the message, attack the messenger. Straight out of Joseph Goebbels, Karl Rove, and Faux News.
Why attack Tom Cruise? Because he stands up to the pharmaceutical drug cartel and their supporters like Brooke Shields. http://www.azcentral.com/ent/celeb/articles/0523cruise.html
But some people might say, "Hey, drugs for postpartum depression are a good thing".
To those people, I invite you to ask Andrea Yates' children.
Oh wait--you can't.
TLC
______________________________________
Did Drugs Cause Mom to Drown Her Five Children?
By Kelly Patricia O'Meara
Andrea Yates' crime shocked the nation. Did mind-altering drugs prescribed to treat her depression actually drive this young mother of five to drown the children she loved?
Only weeks ago, Houston wife and mother Andrea Pia Yates methodically drowned each of her five children. One by one Yates forced her children, ages 6 months to 7 years, into the family's bathtub and held their struggling bodies under the water until each fell limp.
Whatever possessed the 36-year-old mother to commit these unconscionable acts remains murky. Depression and postpartum syndrome topped early speculation, but there has been little discussion about the possible effects of the powerful mind-altering drugs she was taking.
Although Texas District Judge Belinda Hill issued a gag order concerning the case, family members have released disturbing facts about Yates' psychiatric treatment that specialists say may account for her state of mind at the time of the murders.
During a two-year period, Yates was prescribed four extremely potent mind-altering drugs intended to help her through two episodes of severe depression that began after the birth of her fourth child.
The first of these psychopharmacological cocktails included Haldol, an antipsychotic most often used to treat schizophrenia; Effexor, an antidepressant very similar to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs); and Wellbutrin, a unique antidepressant that has amphetaminelike effects.
ccording to Yates' husband, Russell, his wife appeared to respond well to this treatment regimen and, after a short time, became her "old self."
At the onset of the second episode of depression following the birth of her fifth child, and the subsequent death of her father, Yates again was prescribed a psychopharmacological cocktail. This one contained Effexor and, at the end, Remeron.
While information about the Remeron dosage was not made public, Yates' husband has said that his wife was given Effexor at a dosage nearly twice the recommended maximum limit. Just days before the murders, the Effexor was for some reason reduced to just slightly more than the recommended maximum dosage of 225 mg per day and the Remeron was added.
Psychiatrist Peter Breggin, court-qualified medical expert and author of numerous books, including Talking Back to Prozac and the recently released The Anti-Depressant Fact Book, tells Insight:
"The mixture of Remeron and Effexor would tend to be extremely agitating and certainly could lead to behavioral disturbances. The mixture of Haldol, Wellbutrin and Effexor is unpredictable in its effects. Haldol actually can cause depression, and putting the three drugs together is somewhat experimental."
Breggin continues: "Haldol is a very blunting drug. It's difficult to come to any definitive conclusions with so little data about her state of mind at the time. However, Haldol is a drug that produces what can only be referred to as a chemical lobotomy that tends to make a person more docile and robotic."
Many Americans who have read or heard reports about this case have little doubt that Yates was "out of her mind" when she killed her children. What appears to be developing, however, is an argument within the medical community about whether the mother's homicidal state of mind was triggered by the depth of her depression or by the mind-altering drugs prescribed to her.
Were these the actions of a severely depressed woman who "lost it," or did the mind-altering drugs push this emotionally distraught woman over the edge? Should the latter be established in the criminal court, it could raise an even greater issue: Who was responsible? Was it a chemically poisoned mother who carried out the crazed act, the physician who prescribed the mind-altering cocktails or the pharmaceutical companies that manufactured and marketed the treatment?
Only recently have pharmaceutical companies been held responsible for violent behavior associated with their product lines of mind-altering drugs. A case in point is a June trial in which a jury in Cheyenne, Wyo., found that the antidepressant Paxil, one of the newer SSRIs distributed by GlaxoSmithKline PLC, "can cause some individuals to commit suicide and/or homicide."
The jury said Paxil caused Donald Schell, a retired oil-rig worker, to shoot and kill his wife, daughter and granddaughter before turning the gun on himself. Schell had been on the mind-altering drug only two days.
The jury awarded surviving family members $8 million in damages, finding that 80 percent of the fault lay with the drugmaker. Andy Vickery of the Houston law firm of Vickery & Waldner, lead attorney in the Wyoming case, has taken dozens of similar cases seeking to hold responsible those dispensing and manufacturing these drugs.
"The important thing," Vickery explains, "is to lay the responsibility and accountability at the doorstep of those who ought to have it and those who could and should do something about it. Whether it's criminal or civil responsibility, there isn't a lot of difference."
As Vickery puts it, "Look, if I give you a loaded gun and for whatever reason it's likely that you're going to shoot someone, then I'm an accessory before the fact of murder. Shouldn't the drug company that's encouraging doctors to prescribe a drug and is aware that these drugs cause adverse reactions be held responsible?
No one can believe that a mother would do such a thing. It's too horrible. But the fact is these people get completely out of touch with reality because of these drugs. Unfortunately, in most of the cases that I get involved with, we never know if the people committing the violence knew what they were doing when they did it because they also killed themselves."
Although alcoholic-beverage distillers have yet to be held responsible for the overwhelming number of fatalities resulting from alcohol abuse, in many states bartenders are held civilly and criminally liable when customers get drunk and cause automobile fatalities. With the growing number of physicians and psychiatrists prescribing mind-altering drugs and the alarming data filtering out about adverse reactions to them, tort lawyers are asking if medically trained dispensers of psychotropic drugs shouldn't also be held liable.
For example, Yates' psychiatrist, Muhammad Saaed, reportedly prescribed at least one mind-altering drug (Effexor) at almost twice the maximum recommended dose as part of a cocktail of mind-altering drugs that also included Haldol and Wellbutrin during her first bout with severe depression.
A cautionary note in the Physicians Desk Reference says Effexor negatively interacts with Haldol. Apparently, Effexor hinders Haldol's drug clearance by a factor of more than 40 percent and can cause Haldol concentration levels to increase by nearly 90 percent, creating toxicity.
Did Saaed know the contraindications associated with the cocktail he prescribed? If the psychiatrist was unaware of the toxic mix, would ignorance of the potential poisoning make him any less liable than if he had known and prescribed the mind-altering drugs anyway? These are just a few of the questions Saaed may be asked should he have to defend his treatment under oath.
According to Ann Blake Tracy, executive director of the International Coalition for Drug Awareness and author of the recently updated book Prozac: Panacea or Pandora?, there is little doubt about Saaed's culpability.
Tracy, a doctor of health sciences specializing in adverse reactions to serotonergic medications, tells Insight that "when doctors start prescribing 'off label' outside the FDA [Food and Drug Administration] guidelines, they run the risk of being sued for malpractice. In the case of Yates, her psychiatrist already had her on superhigh doses, and on the Monday before the tragedy he dropped the Effexor back to almost the maximum dosage, then added Remeron.
It's well-documented that when doses are increased or decreased, patients experience negative reactions. A great many of the court cases, but certainly not all of them, are a result of the drastic change in the medication."
According to Tracy, "There's a lot of science to demonstrate that depression is the result of an inability to metabolize serotonin, but somehow the drug companies have got the world believing that an increase in serotonin, rather than an increase in serotonin metabolism, is what the depressed person needs. This is the exact opposite of what research on depression shows and, if you look at the research over the last 50 years it is clear that there has been a horrible mistake.
There is such a wanton disregard for life. Why can't these doctors at least read the package inserts so they know how to prescribe the drugs properly? They're not supposed to prescribe over the maximum doses, and they know that they are at toxic levels at that point. That's why they have maximum-dose information; that's why the Food and Drug Administration puts a maximum dose on the packaging. They do it to show that over the allowable dose level, a person becomes toxic and it's extremely dangerous."
When asked what questions she might have for Yates' psychiatrist, Tracy tells Insight: "I'd want to know how he could have ignored so many warnings and contraindications in [reportedly] giving this poor woman this dangerous drug cocktail. I'd also like to know which sleeping pill he uses to knock himself out at night when those five children's faces run over and over again through his mind?"
Harsh words? It appears this is just the beginning. Many who follow such matters say that because of the high profile of the likely trial of Yates for capital murder, it may turn into a landmark case pitting the pharmaceutical giants against the medical practitioners and vice versa, perhaps even dragging in the American Psychiatric Association.
George Parnham, Yates' attorney, has reported that he will enter a not-guilty plea on behalf of his client for reasons of insanity. After meeting with Yates and speaking with psychiatrists that had examined her, Parnham told reporters, "I've accumulated evidence in the last 24 hours that strongly suggests that the mental status of my client will be the issue."
Just what Parnham has discerned is anyone's guess, including whether he'll defend his client by challenging the pharmaceutical companies and his client's psychiatrist. In the meantime, sources close to the case report that Yates still is being medicated. Saaed has turned his files on Yates over to the court and has, to date, made no public statement.
Insight Magazine July 2001
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Mercola's Comment:
Another sad tragedy. One doesn't need an advanced medical degree to recognize that no parent functioning properly would ever drown all their children. The timing of these powerful brain altering drugs appears more than an coincidence in causing this woman to commit such an unthinkable crime.
Another potential factor in post-partum depression could be breastfeeding, or lack thereof. It would be very interesting to find out what percentage of women who go through such depression have breastfed their infants. Unfortunately, I don't know of any studies that have even addressed the issue. But since breastfeeding has many effects on a woman's hormones, it is certainly possible, and should be studied.
To: sarinasvoice@aol.com
Sent: 1/17/2008 7:36:32 P.M. Mountain Standard Time
Subj: The Attacks On Tom Cruise
The mass media is attacking Tom Cruise, again, this time over a Scientology recruitment video. See, for example, the hatchet job from liberal-when-it's-convenient-and-serves-our-corporate-masters Slate, http://www.slate.com/id/2182338?wpisrc=newsletter
Well here we go again: When you don't like the message, attack the messenger. Straight out of Joseph Goebbels, Karl Rove, and Faux News.
Why attack Tom Cruise? Because he stands up to the pharmaceutical drug cartel and their supporters like Brooke Shields. http://www.azcentral.com/ent/celeb/articles/0523cruise.html
But some people might say, "Hey, drugs for postpartum depression are a good thing".
To those people, I invite you to ask Andrea Yates' children.
Oh wait--you can't.
TLC
______________________________________
Did Drugs Cause Mom to Drown Her Five Children?
By Kelly Patricia O'Meara
Andrea Yates' crime shocked the nation. Did mind-altering drugs prescribed to treat her depression actually drive this young mother of five to drown the children she loved?
Only weeks ago, Houston wife and mother Andrea Pia Yates methodically drowned each of her five children. One by one Yates forced her children, ages 6 months to 7 years, into the family's bathtub and held their struggling bodies under the water until each fell limp.
Whatever possessed the 36-year-old mother to commit these unconscionable acts remains murky. Depression and postpartum syndrome topped early speculation, but there has been little discussion about the possible effects of the powerful mind-altering drugs she was taking.
Although Texas District Judge Belinda Hill issued a gag order concerning the case, family members have released disturbing facts about Yates' psychiatric treatment that specialists say may account for her state of mind at the time of the murders.
During a two-year period, Yates was prescribed four extremely potent mind-altering drugs intended to help her through two episodes of severe depression that began after the birth of her fourth child.
The first of these psychopharmacological cocktails included Haldol, an antipsychotic most often used to treat schizophrenia; Effexor, an antidepressant very similar to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs); and Wellbutrin, a unique antidepressant that has amphetaminelike effects.
ccording to Yates' husband, Russell, his wife appeared to respond well to this treatment regimen and, after a short time, became her "old self."
At the onset of the second episode of depression following the birth of her fifth child, and the subsequent death of her father, Yates again was prescribed a psychopharmacological cocktail. This one contained Effexor and, at the end, Remeron.
While information about the Remeron dosage was not made public, Yates' husband has said that his wife was given Effexor at a dosage nearly twice the recommended maximum limit. Just days before the murders, the Effexor was for some reason reduced to just slightly more than the recommended maximum dosage of 225 mg per day and the Remeron was added.
Psychiatrist Peter Breggin, court-qualified medical expert and author of numerous books, including Talking Back to Prozac and the recently released The Anti-Depressant Fact Book, tells Insight:
"The mixture of Remeron and Effexor would tend to be extremely agitating and certainly could lead to behavioral disturbances. The mixture of Haldol, Wellbutrin and Effexor is unpredictable in its effects. Haldol actually can cause depression, and putting the three drugs together is somewhat experimental."
Breggin continues: "Haldol is a very blunting drug. It's difficult to come to any definitive conclusions with so little data about her state of mind at the time. However, Haldol is a drug that produces what can only be referred to as a chemical lobotomy that tends to make a person more docile and robotic."
Many Americans who have read or heard reports about this case have little doubt that Yates was "out of her mind" when she killed her children. What appears to be developing, however, is an argument within the medical community about whether the mother's homicidal state of mind was triggered by the depth of her depression or by the mind-altering drugs prescribed to her.
Were these the actions of a severely depressed woman who "lost it," or did the mind-altering drugs push this emotionally distraught woman over the edge? Should the latter be established in the criminal court, it could raise an even greater issue: Who was responsible? Was it a chemically poisoned mother who carried out the crazed act, the physician who prescribed the mind-altering cocktails or the pharmaceutical companies that manufactured and marketed the treatment?
Only recently have pharmaceutical companies been held responsible for violent behavior associated with their product lines of mind-altering drugs. A case in point is a June trial in which a jury in Cheyenne, Wyo., found that the antidepressant Paxil, one of the newer SSRIs distributed by GlaxoSmithKline PLC, "can cause some individuals to commit suicide and/or homicide."
The jury said Paxil caused Donald Schell, a retired oil-rig worker, to shoot and kill his wife, daughter and granddaughter before turning the gun on himself. Schell had been on the mind-altering drug only two days.
The jury awarded surviving family members $8 million in damages, finding that 80 percent of the fault lay with the drugmaker. Andy Vickery of the Houston law firm of Vickery & Waldner, lead attorney in the Wyoming case, has taken dozens of similar cases seeking to hold responsible those dispensing and manufacturing these drugs.
"The important thing," Vickery explains, "is to lay the responsibility and accountability at the doorstep of those who ought to have it and those who could and should do something about it. Whether it's criminal or civil responsibility, there isn't a lot of difference."
As Vickery puts it, "Look, if I give you a loaded gun and for whatever reason it's likely that you're going to shoot someone, then I'm an accessory before the fact of murder. Shouldn't the drug company that's encouraging doctors to prescribe a drug and is aware that these drugs cause adverse reactions be held responsible?
No one can believe that a mother would do such a thing. It's too horrible. But the fact is these people get completely out of touch with reality because of these drugs. Unfortunately, in most of the cases that I get involved with, we never know if the people committing the violence knew what they were doing when they did it because they also killed themselves."
Although alcoholic-beverage distillers have yet to be held responsible for the overwhelming number of fatalities resulting from alcohol abuse, in many states bartenders are held civilly and criminally liable when customers get drunk and cause automobile fatalities. With the growing number of physicians and psychiatrists prescribing mind-altering drugs and the alarming data filtering out about adverse reactions to them, tort lawyers are asking if medically trained dispensers of psychotropic drugs shouldn't also be held liable.
For example, Yates' psychiatrist, Muhammad Saaed, reportedly prescribed at least one mind-altering drug (Effexor) at almost twice the maximum recommended dose as part of a cocktail of mind-altering drugs that also included Haldol and Wellbutrin during her first bout with severe depression.
A cautionary note in the Physicians Desk Reference says Effexor negatively interacts with Haldol. Apparently, Effexor hinders Haldol's drug clearance by a factor of more than 40 percent and can cause Haldol concentration levels to increase by nearly 90 percent, creating toxicity.
Did Saaed know the contraindications associated with the cocktail he prescribed? If the psychiatrist was unaware of the toxic mix, would ignorance of the potential poisoning make him any less liable than if he had known and prescribed the mind-altering drugs anyway? These are just a few of the questions Saaed may be asked should he have to defend his treatment under oath.
According to Ann Blake Tracy, executive director of the International Coalition for Drug Awareness and author of the recently updated book Prozac: Panacea or Pandora?, there is little doubt about Saaed's culpability.
Tracy, a doctor of health sciences specializing in adverse reactions to serotonergic medications, tells Insight that "when doctors start prescribing 'off label' outside the FDA [Food and Drug Administration] guidelines, they run the risk of being sued for malpractice. In the case of Yates, her psychiatrist already had her on superhigh doses, and on the Monday before the tragedy he dropped the Effexor back to almost the maximum dosage, then added Remeron.
It's well-documented that when doses are increased or decreased, patients experience negative reactions. A great many of the court cases, but certainly not all of them, are a result of the drastic change in the medication."
According to Tracy, "There's a lot of science to demonstrate that depression is the result of an inability to metabolize serotonin, but somehow the drug companies have got the world believing that an increase in serotonin, rather than an increase in serotonin metabolism, is what the depressed person needs. This is the exact opposite of what research on depression shows and, if you look at the research over the last 50 years it is clear that there has been a horrible mistake.
There is such a wanton disregard for life. Why can't these doctors at least read the package inserts so they know how to prescribe the drugs properly? They're not supposed to prescribe over the maximum doses, and they know that they are at toxic levels at that point. That's why they have maximum-dose information; that's why the Food and Drug Administration puts a maximum dose on the packaging. They do it to show that over the allowable dose level, a person becomes toxic and it's extremely dangerous."
When asked what questions she might have for Yates' psychiatrist, Tracy tells Insight: "I'd want to know how he could have ignored so many warnings and contraindications in [reportedly] giving this poor woman this dangerous drug cocktail. I'd also like to know which sleeping pill he uses to knock himself out at night when those five children's faces run over and over again through his mind?"
Harsh words? It appears this is just the beginning. Many who follow such matters say that because of the high profile of the likely trial of Yates for capital murder, it may turn into a landmark case pitting the pharmaceutical giants against the medical practitioners and vice versa, perhaps even dragging in the American Psychiatric Association.
George Parnham, Yates' attorney, has reported that he will enter a not-guilty plea on behalf of his client for reasons of insanity. After meeting with Yates and speaking with psychiatrists that had examined her, Parnham told reporters, "I've accumulated evidence in the last 24 hours that strongly suggests that the mental status of my client will be the issue."
Just what Parnham has discerned is anyone's guess, including whether he'll defend his client by challenging the pharmaceutical companies and his client's psychiatrist. In the meantime, sources close to the case report that Yates still is being medicated. Saaed has turned his files on Yates over to the court and has, to date, made no public statement.
Insight Magazine July 2001
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Mercola's Comment:
Another sad tragedy. One doesn't need an advanced medical degree to recognize that no parent functioning properly would ever drown all their children. The timing of these powerful brain altering drugs appears more than an coincidence in causing this woman to commit such an unthinkable crime.
Another potential factor in post-partum depression could be breastfeeding, or lack thereof. It would be very interesting to find out what percentage of women who go through such depression have breastfed their infants. Unfortunately, I don't know of any studies that have even addressed the issue. But since breastfeeding has many effects on a woman's hormones, it is certainly possible, and should be studied.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Senate Memorial 9 could be our first Victory!
Due to the vigorous Crusade from a Mother's Heart, On January 17, 2008; The Honorable Senator Joseph J. Carraro; while in Santa Fe, NM for the 2008 Regular Session, Introduced to the Floor SM9 (Senate Memorial 9) STUDY ANTIDEPRESSANTS & SUICIDE. (This is the first step towards "Sarina's Law").
Please see the Memorial below.
It is imperative that the Senate pass this Memorial; which will then have the Health Policy Commission and The Department of Health set up a Task Force and make up a finding of facts; as to the study of psychotropic drugs, how they're prescribed and whether or not there needs to be restrictions on who prescribes them.
I am very pleased and proud that this action has taken place; as you all know, my ultimate goal is to have Suicide-Causing Anti-Depressants Abolished completely.
This Memorial is an excellent start, I am also urging Legislature and the Task Force for the respect and acknowledgment to have Sarina's name attached to this Memorial and represent it, it's very important that we all understand that Sarina's Voice is the basis behind this Memorial; which will make certain that Sarina's life and death, and all those hundreds of thousands with her; were not in vein.
PLEASE, everyone contact a member of the NM Legislature and let them know that you support this Memorial and want Sarina's name to represent the Memorial and the Task Force. Also, PLEASE email me back your "detailed" words of support and I will make certain they get into the right hands.
I don't know when the final decision will be made to accept or reject this Memorial, but time is of the essence, please do not delay, please send your letters of support immediately.
Hopefully our first Victory is close -
Senator Carraro and Michael Hely; Sarina and I Thank You !!
............SARINA'S VOICE WILL BE HEARD -
Camille Milke, Eternal "Mommy" of Sarina Angel
Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow and Forever........
My Beautiful Baby Girl, 1/26/86 - 10/28/07, 21 years 9 months 3 days
COPES Foundation (Coalition Of Parents Enduring Suicide)
Founder and President, Main - 505-269-2286, Fax - 505-213-0999
www.COPESFoundation.com
www.ILoveYouSarina21.last-memories.com
SENATE MEMORIAL 9
48TH LEGISLATURE - STATE OF NEW MEXICO - SECOND SESSION, 2008
INTRODUCED BY
Joseph J. Carraro
A MEMORIAL
REQUESTING THAT THE NEW MEXICO HEALTH POLICY COMMISSION CONVENE A TASK FORCE TO STUDY POSSIBLE CORRELATIONS BETWEEN ANTIDEPRESSANTS AND SUICIDAL THOUGHTS AND BEHAVIORS AND TO RECOMMEND SOLUTIONS TO ADDRESS ANY CORRELATION.
WHEREAS, the federal food and drug administration issued a public warning in October 2004 about an increased risk of suicidal thoughts or behaviors in children and adolescents treated with a class of antidepressant medications called selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; and
WHEREAS, in 2006, an advisory committee to the federal food and drug administration recommended that the federal food and drug administration issue a public warning about an increased risk of suicidal thoughts or behaviors in young adults up to the age of twenty-five who are taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; and
WHEREAS, in September 2007, a study, published in the American Journal of Psychiatry, found that there is not a positive correlation between antidepressants and suicidal thoughts or behaviors in young people; and
WHEREAS, studies and professional organizations disagree as to whether the prescription of antidepressant medications should be further regulated or further protocols developed to guard against suicidal thoughts or behaviors among young people; and
WHEREAS, according to the treatment for adolescents with depression study, funded by the national institute of mental health, a combination of medication and psychotherapy is the most effective treatment for adolescents with depression; and
WHEREAS, the federal food and drug administration has issued guidelines stating that individuals who take antidepressants must be carefully monitored for worsening depression, suicidal thoughts or suicidal behaviors; and
WHEREAS, on the basis that some physicians are inadequately monitoring or are unaware of the risks that antidepressants may pose for young people, the state of California has considered legislation that would require all family practice physicians who treat depression by prescribing antidepressants to undergo mandatory continuing medical education on the subject of antidepressant medications;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO that the New Mexico health policy commission be requested to convene a task force comprising experts from the human services department and the department of health; medical and behavioral health providers; and other health care and health policy experts to investigate whether there is a correlation between antidepressant drugs and suicidal thoughts and behaviors and to recommend policy solutions to address the correlation, if it exists; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the task force be requested to examine whether providers who prescribe antidepressants should be required to undergo mandatory continuing medical education on the subject of antidepressant medications in order to provide expertise in monitoring the risks that may be associated with antidepressants in young people; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the task force be requested to examine whether providers should be allowed to prescribe antidepressants to patients only in combination with concurrent psychotherapy; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the task force be requested to examine in particular whether the scope of providers permitted to prescribe psychotropic drugs should be narrowed to include only persons specialized in the practice of psychiatry, psychiatric nurse practitioners and psychiatric physician assistants; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this memorial be transmitted to the New Mexico health policy commission.
Please see the Memorial below.
It is imperative that the Senate pass this Memorial; which will then have the Health Policy Commission and The Department of Health set up a Task Force and make up a finding of facts; as to the study of psychotropic drugs, how they're prescribed and whether or not there needs to be restrictions on who prescribes them.
I am very pleased and proud that this action has taken place; as you all know, my ultimate goal is to have Suicide-Causing Anti-Depressants Abolished completely.
This Memorial is an excellent start, I am also urging Legislature and the Task Force for the respect and acknowledgment to have Sarina's name attached to this Memorial and represent it, it's very important that we all understand that Sarina's Voice is the basis behind this Memorial; which will make certain that Sarina's life and death, and all those hundreds of thousands with her; were not in vein.
PLEASE, everyone contact a member of the NM Legislature and let them know that you support this Memorial and want Sarina's name to represent the Memorial and the Task Force. Also, PLEASE email me back your "detailed" words of support and I will make certain they get into the right hands.
I don't know when the final decision will be made to accept or reject this Memorial, but time is of the essence, please do not delay, please send your letters of support immediately.
Hopefully our first Victory is close -
Senator Carraro and Michael Hely; Sarina and I Thank You !!
............SARINA'S VOICE WILL BE HEARD -
Camille Milke, Eternal "Mommy" of Sarina Angel
Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow and Forever........
My Beautiful Baby Girl, 1/26/86 - 10/28/07, 21 years 9 months 3 days
COPES Foundation (Coalition Of Parents Enduring Suicide)
Founder and President, Main - 505-269-2286, Fax - 505-213-0999
www.COPESFoundation.com
www.ILoveYouSarina21.last-memories.com
SENATE MEMORIAL 9
48TH LEGISLATURE - STATE OF NEW MEXICO - SECOND SESSION, 2008
INTRODUCED BY
Joseph J. Carraro
A MEMORIAL
REQUESTING THAT THE NEW MEXICO HEALTH POLICY COMMISSION CONVENE A TASK FORCE TO STUDY POSSIBLE CORRELATIONS BETWEEN ANTIDEPRESSANTS AND SUICIDAL THOUGHTS AND BEHAVIORS AND TO RECOMMEND SOLUTIONS TO ADDRESS ANY CORRELATION.
WHEREAS, the federal food and drug administration issued a public warning in October 2004 about an increased risk of suicidal thoughts or behaviors in children and adolescents treated with a class of antidepressant medications called selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; and
WHEREAS, in 2006, an advisory committee to the federal food and drug administration recommended that the federal food and drug administration issue a public warning about an increased risk of suicidal thoughts or behaviors in young adults up to the age of twenty-five who are taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; and
WHEREAS, in September 2007, a study, published in the American Journal of Psychiatry, found that there is not a positive correlation between antidepressants and suicidal thoughts or behaviors in young people; and
WHEREAS, studies and professional organizations disagree as to whether the prescription of antidepressant medications should be further regulated or further protocols developed to guard against suicidal thoughts or behaviors among young people; and
WHEREAS, according to the treatment for adolescents with depression study, funded by the national institute of mental health, a combination of medication and psychotherapy is the most effective treatment for adolescents with depression; and
WHEREAS, the federal food and drug administration has issued guidelines stating that individuals who take antidepressants must be carefully monitored for worsening depression, suicidal thoughts or suicidal behaviors; and
WHEREAS, on the basis that some physicians are inadequately monitoring or are unaware of the risks that antidepressants may pose for young people, the state of California has considered legislation that would require all family practice physicians who treat depression by prescribing antidepressants to undergo mandatory continuing medical education on the subject of antidepressant medications;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO that the New Mexico health policy commission be requested to convene a task force comprising experts from the human services department and the department of health; medical and behavioral health providers; and other health care and health policy experts to investigate whether there is a correlation between antidepressant drugs and suicidal thoughts and behaviors and to recommend policy solutions to address the correlation, if it exists; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the task force be requested to examine whether providers who prescribe antidepressants should be required to undergo mandatory continuing medical education on the subject of antidepressant medications in order to provide expertise in monitoring the risks that may be associated with antidepressants in young people; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the task force be requested to examine whether providers should be allowed to prescribe antidepressants to patients only in combination with concurrent psychotherapy; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the task force be requested to examine in particular whether the scope of providers permitted to prescribe psychotropic drugs should be narrowed to include only persons specialized in the practice of psychiatry, psychiatric nurse practitioners and psychiatric physician assistants; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this memorial be transmitted to the New Mexico health policy commission.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
A Response To New Mexico Officials
THIS IS SOMEONE WHO UNDERSTANDS OUR CRUSADE, WHO UNDERSTANDS THAT WE HAVE QUIT OUR FULL TIME JOBS AND SACRIFICED "EVERYTHING" TO MAKE CERTAIN NO MORE PEOPLE DIE. YOU ARE ALL UPSET THAT YOU HAVE A FEW SPAM EMAILS?!? MY DAUGHTER DIED, HOW UPSET DO YOU THINK I AM?!? SPAM EMAILS SHOULD BE THE LEAST OF YOUR PROBLEMS WITH WHAT IS GOING ON IN THIS WORLD. YOU SHOULD BE THANKING ME FOR THIS INFORMATION SO YOU CAN KNOW THE SIGNS BEFORE IT HAPPENS TO YOU -
For New Mexico officials who object to the information being provided by Sarina's Voice:
The US Constitution provides that, "Congress shall make no law...bridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
It is rather obvious that Sarina's parents are attempting to get the government of New Mexico to respond to their grievances. It is likewise clear that some in the government of New Mexico are in the pockets of the pharmaceutical drug cartel.
But this really comes as no surprise for a state that helped George Bu$h steal the Presidency in 2004, http://www.gregpalast.com/recipe-for-a-cooked-election , so that his corporate buddies could continue to loot the treasury and poison our children for obscene profit.
A state that was one of the last to finally ban cockfighting, after its current Governor for years failed to take a stand, http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/42629.html. Not exactly a state where morality is the government's job one.
So unsubscribe all you want. The people of this country are fed up with seeing the government poison their children, disgusted with lives destroyed due to the inaction of those feeding at the public trough. Close your eyes, take your drugs, line your pockets. We the people are on to you.
Terry L. Clark
For New Mexico officials who object to the information being provided by Sarina's Voice:
The US Constitution provides that, "Congress shall make no law...bridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
It is rather obvious that Sarina's parents are attempting to get the government of New Mexico to respond to their grievances. It is likewise clear that some in the government of New Mexico are in the pockets of the pharmaceutical drug cartel.
But this really comes as no surprise for a state that helped George Bu$h steal the Presidency in 2004, http://www.gregpalast.com/recipe-for-a-cooked-election , so that his corporate buddies could continue to loot the treasury and poison our children for obscene profit.
A state that was one of the last to finally ban cockfighting, after its current Governor for years failed to take a stand, http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/42629.html. Not exactly a state where morality is the government's job one.
So unsubscribe all you want. The people of this country are fed up with seeing the government poison their children, disgusted with lives destroyed due to the inaction of those feeding at the public trough. Close your eyes, take your drugs, line your pockets. We the people are on to you.
Terry L. Clark
Sunday, January 6, 2008
The FDA is an Agency of the Public Health Service....Right? Or is it just a "Cop on the Take?"
There are so many attacks on the FDA (rightfully so) that there are articles all over the Internet.
There is so much information about SSRI Anti-depressants. It's also all over the Internet.
The fact that most medications have several undesirable side effects is just accepted. We know there will be discomfort but that's the extent of it right?
The FDA, an agency of the Public Health Service, would not release any medication with more harmful side effects than that right?
Wrong and Wrong.
The Pharmaceutical industry is paying the FDA more and more money while Congress is doing less and less to hold the FDA accountable. In general, people expect drugs that have recently gained FDA approval to be better, more effective and safer than the older and existing drugs they are competing with or replacing. The fact of the matter, however, is that the drug companies are in such a rush to get new drugs on the market; to get their piece (or pieces) of this Billion dollar industry that things like effectiveness and safety are not as important as they used to be. How can this be you ask? Well, Big Pharma is paying the FDA. Big Pharma wants the drugs released sooner than later and, lets face it, the one paying the bills is boss. Having the pharmaceutical industry directly fund the FDA may have started with the best of intentions but now that we see it doesn't work, maybe we should stop it don't you think? Can it be that the FDA has become so corrupted that it actually suppresses information about unsafe drugs in order to get them to market quickly. I would say that is exactly what's happening. I agree that there are certain "new" medications that offer great potential and are unrivaled in the current marketplace. These drugs are the exception and if they offer tremendous potential benefit, then they may need to be gotten to market quickly. Like I said, they are the exception. Most drugs being turned out are just slightly different than current medications offering no tremendous benefit, but being unproven, are capable of untold harm.
Back to the "pieces" of the Billion dollar drug industry. Let's say a certain drug company has 11 drugs currently approved by the FDA and in use. For the sake of an argument we'll call each drug a "piece" and assume all "pieces" get an equal share of the Billions. So this drug company has 11 pieces. If they modify each of their eleven drugs just slightly and "fast track" FDA approval on 2 new versions of each, they now have 33 pieces of the billions! Granted each "piece" will now be worth slightly less but overall profits sky rocket! Lets not forget the FDA gets paid for each of these new drugs too. We are now flooded with similar medications that are no more effective or beneficial than their predecessors, but due to their slight modifications, are unproven and may pose dreadful side effects yet to be determined! Congress, meanwhile, sits back and watches the FDA stick it to the consumer! I'm not here to write about Congress on the take. That's not my fight. Besides I think it's been done maybe once or twice. My fight is against drugs. Specifically SSRI Anti-depressants. They have gained FDA approval; and based on the above example, it's easy to see how. But now that so much damage has been done, why are they still out there? Why are they not recalled? Why are they still used in children, in babies, in pregnant women or in anyone? They put black box warnings on them, which is definitely a step in the right direction, but the time has come to ban these killer drugs! For the FDA to stop succumbing to the pharmaceutical companies for the sake of the almighty dollar with the blood of innocent victims who trusted them on their hands.
The fact that we know they are killing us, the fact that the FDA knows they are not safe and the fact that the drug companies themselves admit how dangerous they are totally demoralizes the FDA. How we view them and what we consider their duties to be. It blows our expectations of the Public Health Service out of the water. It spits in the face of the doctors and scientists who work for the FDA and don't want to approve these drugs but are under so much pressure and have so many incentives from Big Pharma, that they push them through anyway. I'm sure they can't even believe this is going on! They must be just waiting for someone to do something. For Congress or the Public Health Service or Millions of angry Americans to put a stop to it!
We are not members of Congress, not the secretary of the Public Health Service, not even Millions of Americans. What we are though is fed up! We are ready to fight. We are joining many others who have been fighting. We are going to add to their strength in getting something done, in getting changes made. Right now you can add us to all of the other information on the Internet about SSRI Anti-Depressants and the FDA. But we will not stay mere statistics. We will not fade away. We will fight until there are changes. We will fight until there is accountability. We know nothing will ever be "right." Nothing can ever be "right" again. But that will not stop us from trying to help others not be wronged. WE ARE SARINA'S VOICE AND WE WILL BE HEARD!
There is so much information about SSRI Anti-depressants. It's also all over the Internet.
The fact that most medications have several undesirable side effects is just accepted. We know there will be discomfort but that's the extent of it right?
The FDA, an agency of the Public Health Service, would not release any medication with more harmful side effects than that right?
Wrong and Wrong.
The Pharmaceutical industry is paying the FDA more and more money while Congress is doing less and less to hold the FDA accountable. In general, people expect drugs that have recently gained FDA approval to be better, more effective and safer than the older and existing drugs they are competing with or replacing. The fact of the matter, however, is that the drug companies are in such a rush to get new drugs on the market; to get their piece (or pieces) of this Billion dollar industry that things like effectiveness and safety are not as important as they used to be. How can this be you ask? Well, Big Pharma is paying the FDA. Big Pharma wants the drugs released sooner than later and, lets face it, the one paying the bills is boss. Having the pharmaceutical industry directly fund the FDA may have started with the best of intentions but now that we see it doesn't work, maybe we should stop it don't you think? Can it be that the FDA has become so corrupted that it actually suppresses information about unsafe drugs in order to get them to market quickly. I would say that is exactly what's happening. I agree that there are certain "new" medications that offer great potential and are unrivaled in the current marketplace. These drugs are the exception and if they offer tremendous potential benefit, then they may need to be gotten to market quickly. Like I said, they are the exception. Most drugs being turned out are just slightly different than current medications offering no tremendous benefit, but being unproven, are capable of untold harm.
Back to the "pieces" of the Billion dollar drug industry. Let's say a certain drug company has 11 drugs currently approved by the FDA and in use. For the sake of an argument we'll call each drug a "piece" and assume all "pieces" get an equal share of the Billions. So this drug company has 11 pieces. If they modify each of their eleven drugs just slightly and "fast track" FDA approval on 2 new versions of each, they now have 33 pieces of the billions! Granted each "piece" will now be worth slightly less but overall profits sky rocket! Lets not forget the FDA gets paid for each of these new drugs too. We are now flooded with similar medications that are no more effective or beneficial than their predecessors, but due to their slight modifications, are unproven and may pose dreadful side effects yet to be determined! Congress, meanwhile, sits back and watches the FDA stick it to the consumer! I'm not here to write about Congress on the take. That's not my fight. Besides I think it's been done maybe once or twice. My fight is against drugs. Specifically SSRI Anti-depressants. They have gained FDA approval; and based on the above example, it's easy to see how. But now that so much damage has been done, why are they still out there? Why are they not recalled? Why are they still used in children, in babies, in pregnant women or in anyone? They put black box warnings on them, which is definitely a step in the right direction, but the time has come to ban these killer drugs! For the FDA to stop succumbing to the pharmaceutical companies for the sake of the almighty dollar with the blood of innocent victims who trusted them on their hands.
The fact that we know they are killing us, the fact that the FDA knows they are not safe and the fact that the drug companies themselves admit how dangerous they are totally demoralizes the FDA. How we view them and what we consider their duties to be. It blows our expectations of the Public Health Service out of the water. It spits in the face of the doctors and scientists who work for the FDA and don't want to approve these drugs but are under so much pressure and have so many incentives from Big Pharma, that they push them through anyway. I'm sure they can't even believe this is going on! They must be just waiting for someone to do something. For Congress or the Public Health Service or Millions of angry Americans to put a stop to it!
We are not members of Congress, not the secretary of the Public Health Service, not even Millions of Americans. What we are though is fed up! We are ready to fight. We are joining many others who have been fighting. We are going to add to their strength in getting something done, in getting changes made. Right now you can add us to all of the other information on the Internet about SSRI Anti-Depressants and the FDA. But we will not stay mere statistics. We will not fade away. We will fight until there are changes. We will fight until there is accountability. We know nothing will ever be "right." Nothing can ever be "right" again. But that will not stop us from trying to help others not be wronged. WE ARE SARINA'S VOICE AND WE WILL BE HEARD!
Thursday, January 3, 2008
SSRI Thoughts and Observations
Never have we claimed to be experts on the subject but when researching SSRI Anti-depressants, several points become increasingly obvious:
Everyone gets depressed at some time. That doesn't mean everyone has depression.
There is no proof that SSRI antidepressants are beneficial. At least not in the manner they are purported to (increasing serotonin concentration thereby relieving depression).
All children can be hyper and easily distracted for any number of reasons. That doesn't mean all children have ADD or ADHD.
SSRI anti-depressants are not approved for use in children. They are widely prescribed to children despite not having been tested on children. The FDA has approved SSRI anti-depressants for use in adults for treating depression but they can then be prescribed to anyone for any reason. Some doctors prescribe them for chest pains, eating disorders, PMS, hot flashes, Alzheimer's or any number of unapproved and experimental uses.
Studies and use show that the benefits of SSRI anti-depressants are less than that obtained with a sugar pill. Studies also show a change in diet or a walk in the woods is much more effective than SSRI anti-depressants.
Drug companies have suppressed their own findings that SSRI anti-depressants raise suicidal thoughts by 100% (in other words doubling the number of people who have suicidal thoughts compared to those taking a placebo). They also found homicide and aggressive behavior to be side effects of their own medications. Children with obsessive-compulsive disorder taking the medication experienced hostility episodes 17-times more often than depressed patients. 1.1% of healthy, psychiatrically normal people who took an SSRI anti-depressant experienced one or more hostile episodes, while none taking the placebo did
Why do we take a medicine that is so dangerous to stop taking? This is a Pharmaceutical companies dream. A drug you're on for life. If it is so dangerous to stop these medicines (and it is) we shouldn't take them in the first place. What if you forget to take them? What if you can't afford them one time? What if insurance denies you? What if you get tired of the side effects and decide to go off of them cold turkey?
The fact that the FDA is approving these medications and actually "fast tracking" them into use goes against the general conception of what the FDA is here to do. Protect the public by being an expert Federal agency responsible for evaluating and regulating drugs. Not an agency open to the highest bidder.
The fact that doctors are allowed to prescribe SSRI Anti-Depressants for uses and to people other than those they are approved for is bewildering to me!
The fact that Doctors prescribe these medications goes against the general conception of what doctors are supposed to do. All doctors know the side effects. They might not understand the severity or turn a blind eye to the studies but they KNOW the homicidal and suicidal propensities exist. Doctors pledge to "do no harm" or something similar. Why would they overlook the hippocratic or similar oath they took? MONEY, peer pressure, it's easier, more money. Not all doctors, but many. They are only human but we expect so much more from them. They knew the responsibilities and expectations going in. If they can't "do no harm" they need to get out or be forced out of practice.
Everyone gets depressed at some time. That doesn't mean everyone has depression.
There is no proof that SSRI antidepressants are beneficial. At least not in the manner they are purported to (increasing serotonin concentration thereby relieving depression).
All children can be hyper and easily distracted for any number of reasons. That doesn't mean all children have ADD or ADHD.
SSRI anti-depressants are not approved for use in children. They are widely prescribed to children despite not having been tested on children. The FDA has approved SSRI anti-depressants for use in adults for treating depression but they can then be prescribed to anyone for any reason. Some doctors prescribe them for chest pains, eating disorders, PMS, hot flashes, Alzheimer's or any number of unapproved and experimental uses.
Studies and use show that the benefits of SSRI anti-depressants are less than that obtained with a sugar pill. Studies also show a change in diet or a walk in the woods is much more effective than SSRI anti-depressants.
Drug companies have suppressed their own findings that SSRI anti-depressants raise suicidal thoughts by 100% (in other words doubling the number of people who have suicidal thoughts compared to those taking a placebo). They also found homicide and aggressive behavior to be side effects of their own medications. Children with obsessive-compulsive disorder taking the medication experienced hostility episodes 17-times more often than depressed patients. 1.1% of healthy, psychiatrically normal people who took an SSRI anti-depressant experienced one or more hostile episodes, while none taking the placebo did
Why do we take a medicine that is so dangerous to stop taking? This is a Pharmaceutical companies dream. A drug you're on for life. If it is so dangerous to stop these medicines (and it is) we shouldn't take them in the first place. What if you forget to take them? What if you can't afford them one time? What if insurance denies you? What if you get tired of the side effects and decide to go off of them cold turkey?
The fact that the FDA is approving these medications and actually "fast tracking" them into use goes against the general conception of what the FDA is here to do. Protect the public by being an expert Federal agency responsible for evaluating and regulating drugs. Not an agency open to the highest bidder.
The fact that doctors are allowed to prescribe SSRI Anti-Depressants for uses and to people other than those they are approved for is bewildering to me!
The fact that Doctors prescribe these medications goes against the general conception of what doctors are supposed to do. All doctors know the side effects. They might not understand the severity or turn a blind eye to the studies but they KNOW the homicidal and suicidal propensities exist. Doctors pledge to "do no harm" or something similar. Why would they overlook the hippocratic or similar oath they took? MONEY, peer pressure, it's easier, more money. Not all doctors, but many. They are only human but we expect so much more from them. They knew the responsibilities and expectations going in. If they can't "do no harm" they need to get out or be forced out of practice.
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
SARINA'S VOICE
When Sarina became victim to Suicide-Causing SSRI Anti-Depressants, we submerged ourselves into her foundation; into getting Sarina's Voice heard. We continue to do so everyday and will continue for everyday to come until Sarina's Voice can carry the news of these horrendous killer drugs to all. Until something is done either by legislature or public outcry or the flat out refusal of people to subject themselves and their children and everyone else to this torture.
If people knew the facts about these drugs, they would not use them! They would not make SSRI's their "chemical babysitters"! THESE DRUGS KILL! What else is there to know? Plenty of information to back this up is readily available to anyone on the Internet with the desire to see the truth. The truth is what Sarina's Voice and the COPES Foundation are all about. Exposing the truth so everyone is aware of the danger that confronts us everyday! It's not enough to keep your kids off of these drugs, however. You also have to worry about your kids friends, their teachers, bus drivers, neighbors, cousins, uncles, aunts, you, your spouse, boyfriends, girlfriends, etc. The list goes on and on. Everyone has the potential to be affected in a horrible way. I fear everyone will be affected by SSRI's in a devastating way in their lifetime. That's why we look to abolish these drugs completely. Of course that is a large order and there is much to consider. Putting aside the obvious problem of the drug companies and everyone else profiting from these drugs we still need to think about withdrawals, substitute treatments, loss of jobs, etc. BUT IT MUST BE DONE! WE WILL NOT BACK DOWN! The lives we are sacrificing to keep these drugs are increasing dramatically. When will enough be enough? When will people open their eyes? When will we realize that "this really could happen to me"? I wish I knew. I know one thing though. It will be easier to do with the support of everyone who reads this. With the support of not only those who have lost someone but also those who don't want to lose someone. To those who think that big business and profits don't have to come at the expense of other human beings. To those who think the "American Way" is supposed to be a good thing!
Help spread the word, talk to your politicians, talk to the newspaper or TV station about doing a story, talk to your friends and family. Help educate America and the world by letting Sarina's Voice be heard! At the very least, pass this on and sign the petition at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/COPESfoundation/ . Remember there is no donation required to sign the petition and donations on the petition website don't go towards COPES Foundation. Also visit our website at http://www.COPESFoundation.com/ and email us your name and information to mailto:SarinasVoice@aol.com .
Thank you in advance for your time, your effort, your support. Thank you in advance for the safety of our children and grandchildren. Thank you for joining together to make SARINA'S VOICE heard.
If people knew the facts about these drugs, they would not use them! They would not make SSRI's their "chemical babysitters"! THESE DRUGS KILL! What else is there to know? Plenty of information to back this up is readily available to anyone on the Internet with the desire to see the truth. The truth is what Sarina's Voice and the COPES Foundation are all about. Exposing the truth so everyone is aware of the danger that confronts us everyday! It's not enough to keep your kids off of these drugs, however. You also have to worry about your kids friends, their teachers, bus drivers, neighbors, cousins, uncles, aunts, you, your spouse, boyfriends, girlfriends, etc. The list goes on and on. Everyone has the potential to be affected in a horrible way. I fear everyone will be affected by SSRI's in a devastating way in their lifetime. That's why we look to abolish these drugs completely. Of course that is a large order and there is much to consider. Putting aside the obvious problem of the drug companies and everyone else profiting from these drugs we still need to think about withdrawals, substitute treatments, loss of jobs, etc. BUT IT MUST BE DONE! WE WILL NOT BACK DOWN! The lives we are sacrificing to keep these drugs are increasing dramatically. When will enough be enough? When will people open their eyes? When will we realize that "this really could happen to me"? I wish I knew. I know one thing though. It will be easier to do with the support of everyone who reads this. With the support of not only those who have lost someone but also those who don't want to lose someone. To those who think that big business and profits don't have to come at the expense of other human beings. To those who think the "American Way" is supposed to be a good thing!
Help spread the word, talk to your politicians, talk to the newspaper or TV station about doing a story, talk to your friends and family. Help educate America and the world by letting Sarina's Voice be heard! At the very least, pass this on and sign the petition at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/COPESfoundation/ . Remember there is no donation required to sign the petition and donations on the petition website don't go towards COPES Foundation. Also visit our website at http://www.COPESFoundation.com/ and email us your name and information to mailto:SarinasVoice@aol.com .
Thank you in advance for your time, your effort, your support. Thank you in advance for the safety of our children and grandchildren. Thank you for joining together to make SARINA'S VOICE heard.
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
"Medication for Depression" The excuse is the cause
Whenever a tragedy happens and people say he/she was on "medication for depression," people regard that as some justification for the event. In other words "Of course she jumped off that building. She was on medication for depression. She was depressed and couldn't take it anymore. Not even her medicine could save her" or "That's why he set himself on fire, he has had depression since he was ten. He was given Anti-Depressants. What else could have been done?" Unfortunately, this is the thinking of most people. And why not? It makes sense right? Only if you want to pass over it and not think about it anymore. In reality the "medication for depression" is causing more depression, mania, bi-polar disorder, akethisia (the feeling of crawling out of your skin), seizures and so on. That is what makes it unbearable! Trying to control things like serotonin, cortisol (basically trying to control the complex human brain) causes dangerous imbalances in the brain and body and any number of unpredictable and uncontrollable responses. At the same time you are taking away their ability to cope with these problems. That's why the man who was depressed from age ten doesn't act out on his thoughts until he is subjected to an SSRI anti-depressant or has his dosage increased or has his medication changed or stops taking it abruptly. A person who is "depressed" gets suicidal and homicidal ideations FROM the medicine not IN SPITE OF the medicine!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)