From a Strip Mall, Chicago Psychiatrist Delivers High-Risk Meds, Cut-Rate Care To Elderly

by Christina Jewett, ProPublica, and Sam Roe, Chicago Tribune

Dr. Michael Reinstein is one of the most prolific providers of psychiatric care in Chicago-area nursing homes and mental health facilities. But he is trailed by lawsuits and complaints while getting government reimbursement for seeing a large number of patients.

Inside Chicago's Maxwell Manor nursing home, Dr. Michael Reinstein's patients suffered from side effects so severe that they trembled, hallucinated or lost control of their bladders.

Staffers told state investigators that so many patients were clamoring to complain to Reinstein about their medications that a security guard was assigned to accompany him on his visits. In addition, staffers said Reinstein had induced patients to take powerful antipsychotic drugs with the promise of passes to leave the home.

Though state officials shut that facility in 2000 for inadequate care and wretched conditions, Reinstein, the home's lead psychiatrist, continued to practice. Today he is one of the most prolific providers of psychiatric care in Chicago-area nursing homes and mental health facilities, even as he is trailed by lawsuits and complaints like the ones at Maxwell Manor.

Neither state nor federal officials appear to have ever assembled a complete picture of Reinstein’s thriving practice, built in part within Illinois’ poorly regulated system of nursing homes serving the mentally ill. But an investigation by ProPublica and the Tribune found that Reinstein has compiled a worrisome record, providing assembly-line care with a highly risky drug. Searching publicly available documents, reporters discovered that Reinstein, 66, has been accused of overmedicating his mentally ill patients. His unusually heavy reliance on the drug clozapine — a potent psychotropic medication that carries five "black box" warnings — has been linked to at least three deaths.

In 2007 he prescribed various medications to 4,141 Medicaid patients, including more prescriptions for clozapine than were written by all the doctors in Texas put together, Medicaid records show.

Records also show he is getting reimbursement for seeing an improbably large number of patients. Documents filled out by Reinstein suggest that if each of his patient visits lasts 10 minutes, he would have to work 21 hours a day, seven days a week. Research has found that the typical U.S. psychiatrist sees about 35 patients per week; Reinstein sees 60 each day, he wrote in an audit report in 2007.

Illinois provides some powerful incentives for cut-rate, high-volume care in nursing homes for the mentally ill, where Reinstein sees most of his patients.

The state Medicaid program pays psychiatrists as little as $22 per patient for some services, a rate drastically less than customary fees. State lawmakers recently failed to act on a bill that would have given psychiatrists the first Medicaid fee increase in years.

Working from a strip-mall office in Uptown, Reinstein says he is psychiatric medical director at 13 nursing facilities, seeing patients with chronic mental illness whom few doctors will accept. Those include people with schizophrenia, who make up the bulk of his practice. His supporters say they admire the hard working doctor, who makes daily rounds in a car with 140,000 miles on the odometer. And Reinstein maintains that clozapine was not to blame for the patient deaths.

In written statements to ProPublica and the Tribune, Reinstein said he does work long hours seven days a week, as do his four partners, who separately also prescribe clozapine. State records overstate his workload, he said, because of a computer system that forces him to submit claims several times. He said he is trying to recruit more doctors to his practice, but it has been difficult because of low pay, high malpractice insurance rates and a perception that the work is dangerous.
He also strongly defended his reliance on clozapine, saying the medication is underprescribed and is the most effective in its class for schizophrenic patients. That view is supported by a prominent study that found clozapine helped patients more than similar, newer drugs. Clozapine can control psychotic episodes, reduce suicide risk and help patients live independently outside of institutions, Reinstein said.

"The most gratifying part of my day," he wrote, "(is) when patients reach this level and come to the office!!!"
Autopsy and court records show that three patients under Reinstein’s care died of clozapine intoxication. Alvin Essary died at age 50 inside at the Somerset Place nursing home on the North Side in 1999. Medical records show that when he died his blood contained five times the toxic level of clozapine.

The plaintiff’s expert in his family’s medical malpractice lawsuit contended that Reinstein was grossly negligent to give multiple medications to a man with only one kidney. Reinstein settled the claims against him for $85,000, but Essary’s sister, Shirley Palmer, said she can’t believe he is still practicing.

"There’s nothing that’s been done to this doctor who’s caused all these problems," Palmer said. "It makes me mad that this keeps going on."

Reinstein has a far different view of his career.

"I am grateful for the opportunity to be of service to the patients I treat and have treated for over 37 years," he wrote. "I take pride in the many people I have been able to help and feel badly about those patients who have not seen the benefits of treatment."

Potent pill, multiple warnings

Use of any medication carries risks, but clozapine stands out. It ranks just behind the more widely used painkiller oxycodone as the medication suspected in the most patient deaths, according to a study that examined reports to the Food and Drug Administration.

The "black box" warnings -- the FDA's strongest -- on clozapine’s label detail serious potential side effects, from enlargement of the heart to rapid drops in blood pressure to increased seizure risk. Doctors also are required to take regular blood samples to ensure patients’ immune systems aren’t shutting down.

The FDA approved the drug for only a sliver of the population: the actively suicidal or the quarter of schizophrenic patients who do not improve on medications with lesser side effects. Yet Reinstein last year said under oath that his practice once had more than 300 patients among 415 in one Chicago nursing home on clozapine.

Reinstein said he completes the FDA-mandated blood tests for patients on clozapine but calls them "excessive and severe." Although other psychiatrists said it is crucial to discuss the numerous risks of clozapine with patients, Reinstein said he gives them the product insert — and hopes they read it.

His use of clozapine is at the heart of separate lawsuits filed after the deaths of two patients he treated: Odell Spruell and Wendy Cureton.

Reinstein took over Spruell’s care in 2007 when the 54-year-old was transferred from a nursing home to a psychiatric ward after hitting other patients and staff, records show. A former steel mill worker, Spruell had been stable on a low dose of clozapine for about two years. Reinstein doubled his dose and returned him to the nursing home.
Spruell lived another two weeks under the care of a Reinstein partner. During that time, he grew increasingly lethargic and suffered other symptoms associated with overmedication. His hands shook, he drooled and he began sleeping all the time, said his sister, Irma Spruell.

"He was too weak to get up," she said. "He tried to talk, but he couldn’t."

Staff members at Spruell’s nursing home also noticed his lethargy. In response, they put him into physical therapy. Five days later, Spruell fell unconscious and could not be revived. An autopsy showed that said he died of clozapine intoxication. A lawsuit is pending in Cook County Circuit Court.

Reinstein declined to comment, citing a patient privacy law.

Cureton, 27, died four years before Spruell. In 2003, she was moved from a nursing home to the psychiatric ward at Kindred Hospital North on Chicago’s North Side.

She had grown increasingly aggressive after two of her family members died in a house fire. Reinstein, her supervising psychiatrist, and two partners repeatedly boosted Cureton’s clozapine dose — two times faster than the recommended pace, according to her medical records and guidelines published by the drug’s maker. Medical staff noted that she remained hostile and unpredictable, at times pounding on the wall or laughing at it.

On the 10th day in the psychiatric ward, Cureton had trouble breathing and was taken to the emergency room. The drug’s label explicitly warns of that adverse reaction and says doctors should not mix clozapine and certain sedatives, as the team under Reinstein’s supervision had done, medical records show.

Reinstein saw her after she returned from the emergency room and boosted her dose of another antipsychotic, her medical records show. Within days, Cureton collapsed next to her bed and could not be revived.

A medical malpractice suit is pending in Cook County Circuit Court. In a pretrial deposition, Reinstein defended boosting the dose of the clozapine, saying Cureton was obese and had tolerated a high amount in the past. He also said the autopsy finding that she died of clozapine intoxication was unreliable because research shows that clozapine levels spike after death.
The physician who performed the autopsy did not dispute that. But he said Cureton’s sudden collapse before death and the condition of her heart and lungs afterward led him to conclude that she died of clozapine intoxication.

‘He wouldn’t talk to them’

Reinstein has his supporters in the medical community. Nurse Bernadette Wright lavished him with praise, saying, "The man is a genius."

"He knows his patients," said Wright, head of nursing at Sacred Heart Home in Chicago, where Reinstein is psychiatric medical director. "He knows them by name and by face. When you tell him about a patient, he knows their history."

Reinstein "would never" give risky drugs without properly monitoring patients, she said.

But one nurse who worked with Reinstein said she worried that he was too busy to give his patients the time they needed.
Former Riveredge Hospital nurse Eileen "Cookie" Kempe said in an interview that when Reinstein visited, he went into a room and furiously wrote on stacks of medical records as his patients lined up in the hall. "He wouldn’t talk to them," said Kempe, who worked with Reinstein for a year until 2004. "I never saw him go in a patient room, ever. They got no therapeutic interaction with a doctor."

Riveredge is where Reinstein treated a 27-year-old pregnant patient, Tameka Williams, in 2007 after she had an acute schizophrenic episode. She never signed a required form agreeing to take clozapine; nor was her immediate family consulted, according to records and interviews.

Even though it has not been proved safe for use during pregnancy, Reinstein prescribed clozapine, Williams' medical records show. At some point, Williams had developed a blood clot -- a condition particularly threatening for a patient on clozapine. She died days after being admitted when the clot lodged in her heart. A lawsuit against Reinstein is pending in Cook County Circuit Court.

State regulators inspecting Westwood Manor, a Chicago nursing home, noted in 2003 that several of Reinstein’s patients were not properly monitored. Some showed apparent clozapine side effects. One trembled when he walked. Another kept a cigarette butt in her mouth to prevent her tongue from jutting out.

In a written response to the inspection, Reinstein cited a "lack of clinical sophistication on the part of the evaluator(s) … on medication effectiveness." He also said in a written response to reporters that tongue jutting and trembling "are not usual" side effects of clozapine.

Reinstein's troubles were perhaps most dramatic at Maxwell Manor, a South Side nursing home. The Illinois State Police and the U.S. Postal Service began investigating Reinstein in 2000 amid accusations of billing fraud, according to documents obtained through public records requests.

Included in those documents is the account of a Maxwell Manor psychiatric supervisor who said Reinstein heavily promoted Clozaril, the original brand name for clozapine. Deborah Grier told state police investigators that Reinstein had handed out glossy fliers to staff and prescribed the drug to nearly all of his patients.

Grier, who has since died, said Reinstein persuaded some patients to take the drug by offering passes to leave the home.
She said patients often complained of hallucinations from the drug and that she "had many conversations with Reinstein about how many patients … had bad reactions." But she said he "very seldom" reduced doses or switched drugs, investigators wrote.
Another Maxwell Manor worker, Engoyama Fela, told investigators that Reinstein "would not spend more than one minute" with a patient during his rounds, according to a summary of the interview. "Many patients became agitated and rebellious because they knew they needed care and they wanted to talk to Reinstein but were not allowed to," he said.

Fela said Maxwell Manor security staffers were assigned to guard Reinstein when he came to update their medical records.
Reinstein, in a written response to reporters, denied the workers’ allegations, saying he spends an appropriate amount of time treating patients in consultation with other medical staff. He agreed that security was present at Maxwell Manor but not specifically to protect him. "This facility had many violent and disruptive patients," he said.

Several years after regulators shut the home, the U.S. Justice Department, in a separate civil fraud case, alleged that residents had been routinely abused and medicated as punishment.

Reinstein, who said he saw a majority of the patients at the facility, was not a defendant in the federal civil case. Criminal prosecutors investigating possible billing fraud by Reinstein did not file charges against him.
Barry Miller, the prosecutor overseeing the criminal inquiry, declined to comment. Case records say the matter was referred to Medicare to recover any overpayments. Agency officials declined to comment. Reinstein said he was not sanctioned by Medicare and did not have to reimburse the agency.

Retired state investigator Ray Lewis was unhappy to see the criminal case closed. In a recent interview, he said that if there were one Medicaid fraud case he could revisit, Reinstein’s would be it. "I’d investigate it for free," Lewis said.
The agency responsible for investigating physician conduct, the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, does not reveal to the public the number of complaints filed against doctors, only findings where there was formal disciplinary action. In 1997, the agency cited Reinstein for improperly admitting a patient for psychiatric care and ordered him to complete 50 hours of education.

Since then, the agency has received at least one other complaint about Reinstein.

In 2003, Chicago psychiatrist Dr. Mark Amdur, of the Thresholds mental health organization, became so concerned about Reinstein’s work at area nursing homes that he asked his staff to find out how many patients came under Reinstein’s care. The number — 2,300 — surprised him.

"I believe that the apparent concentration of care under a single practitioner should be a matter of concern ...," Amdur wrote state regulators.

When asked what happened to his complaint, the Illinois Department of Public Health said it could not be found, and the professional regulation agency could produce no evidence of follow-up.

Amdur said he never got a response. "There ought to be some outside review for the benefit of the people residing in these nursing homes," he said.


Researchers Lisa Schwartz and Kitty Bennett contributed to this report. This story was co-published with the Chicago Tribune.

‘REAL PEOPLE’ CONTINUE TO WEIGH-IN ON GENERATION RX

I’ve been traveling the globe again — and beg your forgiveness as my blog has been unavoidably neglected whilst I have been away. But that doesn’t mean I’ve quit writing — oh no.

In fact, quite the opposite is true.

The beauty of email and the www is that I can check-in every so often — from remote Indian villages and other far-flung corners of North America. And when I do, your words are often the perfect salve for a tired road warrior.

Thank you.

Below are a few of the most recent comments about Generation RX — written by you. I share them with you now — and promise to be back in full swing on the blog VERY soon.

Peace,
Kevin P. Miller
6 November 2009



Short sighted "solution" becomes all of our problem, and the ones lost here are our children
Review by Chris

This movie is a must view for every person on this planet. Since viewing this movie, I have made, and continue to make every reasonable effort to let my friends and family know about this movie.

My sincere hope is that we as a people, can get educated, and informed about this situation and avoid "big pharma's" short sighted "solutions" that only becomes all of our problem. The biggest victims here are of course the children, and the families are left trying to pick up the pieces and understand why things went so terribly wrong.



This movie is more than just eye opening and heart wrenching. It informs and educates on so many levels. The understanding that takes place is on the deepest levels humanity has to offer. 

While my heart goes out for all of the families who have had their children taken from them, my soul also pains for the millions of children who at this moment are still having their childhood and very make up of who they are becoming robbed from them- all in the name of "big pharma" making a buck.
Think about it.....every level of protection for the children has failed them miserably- from the parents trusting the counsel of the so called "professionals" to the governments sess pool supposed consumer watch dog the FDA. Nothing could be down right more dispicable. The fraud is perpetrated upon the parents, and in turn the children suffer. As these children suffer and are destroyed in one fashion or another, so are we.....are not children our very future?

We all owe it to ourselves to get better informed.

We owe it to our children to be their guardian angels, and to take real steps to protect them and allow them to become the people they are meant to become. How dare the FDA, the doctors, the school counselors and any one eles who would willingly participate in pushing drugs on our children- not for benefit, but for profit. 

This film exposes, promotes, and touches. There are no adequate words to describe it- you have to experience it for yourself.

Thank you Kevin Miller. Thank you for taking the time, going through the painstaking work and getting this so vital and important, life saving information out to us the public.





Critical for everyone to see
Review by Judy

This DVD needs to be placed in the hands of every person in the world.

Thank God for this information and my prayer is that I can inform all my family, friends and anyone I come into contact with to watch it and change the furture of their families.

The middle school tried to get me to put my son on meds when he was in 6th grade. I knew it was because they couldn't "control" him, but I refused. I didn't know this information at that time, I wish I had.

I will show this DVD to my daughter and son-in-law because they too have a little mover and shaker who is 6 and isn't the compliant child that most scholls expect in their classes.

Is there a way to make this more affordable so it can be mass produced and mass distributed to those who are struggling financially? I would suspect that their children are placed on these drugs at an even higher rate than those we see in the DVD!



Thank you for opening my eyes. God bless you.



ESSENTIAL VIEWING!!!
Review by SamSara

this movie was grim and scary, but good!!
it's upsetting to see how the people who are supposed to be safeguarding us from drug abuse are so connected to the profits of the pharmaceutical industry. 

and everyday people are being hurt! some really tough personal stories from families who've lost a lot. 

not all the information is even new - just old stories that got buried! why are these drugs still OK? it seems crazy that the corruption described in the film is still going on, maybe even getting worse! more people sure are being medicated...

everyone should see Generation RX - tell your friends and write to congress - don't let them keep putting our kids and families at risk)



The movie is sobering, but you have to see it
Review by software geek

The drugging of children for profit is one of the most despicable crimes that is occurring in our society at this time. This movie educates and raises awareness of what is occurring right now. 

Generation RX is an extremely well-done documentary that documents the facts of how we are being used for financial gain. There are innocent victims that are being exploited - children. This was once an untapped market that the Pharmaceutical industry mines using the best talent from Madison Avenue and then spreading the wealth to others that are in a position to forward their goals (JAMA, New England Journal of Medicine, doctors, ...). 



You'll learn how we got where we are today. The DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) lists disorders, including the behavioral disorders such as ADHD, bi-polar, and so on, that enables doctors to prescribe a drug even though there is no medical test to support it. One thing I learned is that the committee / authors of the DSM have financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry. In some areas 100% of the panel members have financial ties. The corruptness of the FDA is also made clear and how we need a firewall between the regulators and those that profit from what is being regulated. Right now we have a "fox watching the hen house" scenario. 



How these drugs got approved when there was clear evidence of the harm they cause is brought out. The data of prozac was available 20+ years ago, yet these drugs were approved. 

Many have stated that ADHD is a made-up disease to collect patients that manifest the stated symptoms of ADHD. Yet when such a panel of "experts" met and a question was raised to describe the symptoms, the so-called expert could not answer the question. He yammers on for minutes making an utter fool of himself but clearing showing that ADHD is merely a four letter acronym to somehow make it seem like a disease that allows drugs to be prescribed and profits to be made while children's lives are ruined or even ended by suicide. 



Generation RX gets the point across without undue emotion. It clearly presents with facts and personal stories what the current scene is today and what occurred to get us there. We know the players that created this system. We also are challenged to do something about it. It is an ethical point and all of us need to do something to change it, even if it is writing a letter to our elected representatives. 

The movie is sobering but you have to see it. Our futures depend on our children and our children depend on us.

TORONTO'S M.U.C.K. FILM FESTIVAL ROLLS OUT THE RED CARPET FOR SOCIAL CHANGE

by Brad Frenette
The National Post

Movies of Un-Common Knowledge: It's the theme, and the name of, Toronto's newest film festival.

Wisely staying out of the way of Toronto's other film fest, the M.U.C.K. Film Festival & Forum "turns the spotlight on individual action and meaningful social change. Films covering the span of human rights, the environment, and political, social, economic and corporate imbalances will be featured".

The festival is organized into screening days, with all films showing at one theatre, The Royal on Toronto's College Street.

Among the films making their Canadian premiere include: opening night gala Fuel, which won the Audience Award at last year's Sundance; Pray The Devil Back to Hell, which took the best doc award at this year's Tribeca Film Festival; and Franny Armstrong's Age of Stupid, which stars Oscar-winner Pete Postlethwaite.

Here is the complete schedule:

Thursday, October 1st – Opening Night Gala

7:30 pm: FUEL (112 min., US, dir. Josh Tickell, 2008)
In 1997 Josh Tickell, filmmaker and environmentalist, set out on the road with a biodiesel powered “Veggie Van” and a video camera and began filming what would eventually become known as FUEL. The 2008 Sundance Audience Award winning documentary investigates the possible replacement of fossil fuels with renewable energy, providing an uplifting testament to the immediacy of new energy solutions.
**CANADIAN PREMIERE



Friday, October 2nd

12 noon: RETHINK AFGHANISTAN (81 min., US, dir. Robert Greenwald, 2009)
RETHINK AFGHANISTAN is a skeptical view of America’s war strategies. Greenwald suggests that pursuing a military solution in Afghanistan is not working, won’t work and should be abandoned. His full-length documentary campaign features experts from Afghanistan, the US and Russia, discussing critical issues like military escalation, how escalation will affect Pakistan and the surrounding region, the cost of war, civilian casualties and the rights of Afghan women.
**CANADIAN PREMIERE

3:30 pm: A CALL TO ARMS (70 min., US, dir. Scott Miller, 2009)
A CALL TO ARMS tells the story of military members who were ordered against their will to receive the controversial anthrax vaccine. The film interviews military personnel who have been adversely affected by this vaccine and others who have refused the vaccine, facing disciplinary action. Years later, after all the disturbing facts about the vaccine have surfaced, the US and Canadian military still intends to vaccinate all troops going to Afghanistan and Iraq.
**CANADIAN PREMIERE

6:30 pm: PRAY THE DEVIL BACK TO HELL (72 min., US, dir. Gini Reticker, 2008)
A story of courageous Muslim and Christian women in Liberia who decide to work together to end the country’s bloody civil war and bring peace back to a country in ruins. Through long-term non-violence combined with emphatic protests, women from different backgrounds demonstrate that spontaneous activism can change the history of a nation. PRAY THE DEVIL BACK TO HELL is a commanding, inspiring, and emotionally stirring documentary about the futility of war and the splendors of peace. Winner Best Documentary, Tribeca Film Festival, 2009.
**CANADIAN PREMIERE

9:15 pm: SHOUTING FIRE (80 min., US, dir. Liz Garbus, 2008)
SHOUTING FIRE uses a handful of post 9/11 events to elucidate the current state of the right to free speech. Garbus postulates that the post-9/11 effect, as evidenced by the fact that when threatened by an outside enemy, perceived or real, we often demonize each other, undermines the very freedom we seek to protect. Mixing vibrant pacing with an elegant journalistic style, SHOUTING FIRE documents the way both the Right and the Left have lashed out in fear, and warns that if we don’t fight for our freedoms every day, we will lose them.
**CANADIAN PREMIERE

Saturday, October 3rd

12 noon & 12 midnight: RIP: A REMIX MANIFESTO (102 min., Canada, dir. Brett Gaylor, 2008)
Mash-up your life! The ultimate guide to the musical phenomenon of re-mixed mash-ups. The cult DJ, GIRL TALK, pulls magic out of his laptop and the crowd freaks out! A master of mash-ups, he mixes samples of existing music into new songs, and “violates” copyright rules.
Web activist Brett Gaylor is on the side of the “Copy Lefts,” who fight for free access to source material. On the other side, the “Copy Rights” seek to defend the old, established film and music industries.
The Internet is the most effective way human beings have devised to share their ideas. The question is how easy, or not, it is for us to share our music, videos, all our creative works or any media. This is the focus of RIP: A REMIX MANIFESTO, a bold documentary on intellectual property for the Digital Age

3:30 pm: ENJOY POVERTY (90 min., Netherlands, dir. Renzo Martens, 2008)
Deep in the interiors of the Congo, Dutch artist Renzo Martens single-handedly undertakes an epic journey and launches a program that helps the poor become aware of their primary capital resource: Images of Poverty.

6:30pm: AGE OF STUPID (89 min., UK, dir. Franny Armstrong, 2009)
It’s 2055 and Academy Award ® nominated Pete Postlethwaite (In The Name of the Father) stars as the founder of The Global Archive, a storage facility located in the (now melted) Arctic, preserving all of humanity's achievements in the hope that the planet might one day be habitable again.
**CANADIAN PREMIERE

9:15 pm: GENERATION RX (81 min., US, dir. Kevin P. Miller, 2008)
For decades, scores of doctors, government officials, journalists and others have extolled the benefits of psychiatric medicines for children. GENERATION RX presents “the rest of the story” and unveils how this era of unprecedented change in Western culture really occurred – and what price has been paid by our society. This powerful documentary questions whether we have forced millions of children onto pharmaceutical drugs for commercial rather than scientific reasons.
**CANADIAN PREMIERE

Sunday, October 4th

1 pm: THE WORLD ACCORDING TO MONSANTO (102 min., France/Canada/Germany, dir. Marie-Monique Robin, 2008)
Monsanto is the world’s leader in genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This 100-year-old empire has created some of the most toxic products ever sold, including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and the herbicide Agent Orange. This never-before-told story of misleading reports, collusion, pressure tactics and attempts at corruption, makes up the history of this global corporation. Behind its “clean green image,” Monsanto is now tightening its grasp on the world seed market, striving for market domination, resulting in a detriment to food security and the global environment.

3:30 pm: BLACK NATION (70 min., Sweden, dir. Mats Hjelm, 2008)
BLACK NATION is a documentary feature film that takes a hard, uncompromising look at the state of black men in America today through the prism of the streets of Detroit and the city’s controversial Church Shrine of the Black Madonna.
**WORLD PREMIERE

6:30 pm: CRUDE (101 min., US, dir. Joe Berlinger, 2009)
Three years in the making, this riveting new documentary from acclaimed filmmaker Joe Berlinger tells the epic story of one of the largest and most controversial legal cases on the planet. An inside look at the infamous $27
billion "Amazon Chernobyl" case, CRUDE is a real-life, high stakes legal drama involving global politics, the environmental movement, celebrity activism, human rights advocacy, multinational corporate power and the fate of disappearing indigenous cultures.
**CANADIAN PREMIERE

9:15 pm: CALL + RESPONSE (86 min., US, dir. Justin Dillon, 2009)
There are more slaves today than ever before in human history. CALL + RESPONSE is the story of the world’s 27 million modern slaves -- from the child brothels of Cambodia to the slave brick kilns of rural India. Directed by musician Justin Dillon, recording artists began to accept his persistent vision that popular music owes a debt to the issue of slavery. Music is part of the movement against human slavery and connects the music of the American slave fields to the popular music we listen to today, demonstrating this connection as a rallying cry for the modern abolitionist movement currently brewing.
**CANADIAN PREMIERE

• M.U.C.K. Film Festival & Forum tickets and passes can be purchased in-person at the T.O. TIX Booth, located at Yonge-Dundas Square on the corner of Yonge and Dundas in downtown Toronto. Tickets are priced at $10 per screening, $20 for the opening night gala, $100 festival pass/$75 for students and a day pass is $30/$20 for students.


© 2009 The National Post Company. All rights reserved.

THE TRUTH ABOUT CODEX — AN INTERVIEW WITH PAUL ANTHONY TAYLOR

The most recent issue of Formula AS, a popular Romanian magazine, carried an interview on the subject of Codex Alimentarius with the Rath Foundation's External Relations Director, Paul Anthony Taylor. Paul is an internationally-known writer, researcher and lecturer on the subject of Codex, and, during the past six years, courtesy of the National Health Federation, has been an official observer delegate at Codex meetings.

I can also attest to Paul's integrity and his commitment to truth.

For those of you still unaware, The activities of Codex are increasingly perceived by natural health advocates as one of the biggest global threats to the future availability of therapeutic vitamin supplements and other micronutrient-based natural health therapies. Sponsored by the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, I unveiled this threat in my film We Become Silent, which was narrated by the great Dame Judi Dench.

Explaining how Codex is not about health, and describing how the 27 European Union member states are increasingly using it as a vehicle for shaping global food and nutrient regulations to reflect EU law, Paul's insights are essential reading for everybody who is interested in understanding this important issue.

The full, unabridged version of the Formula AS interview with Paul follows below.

What is Codex Alimentarius?

The Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) is a United Nations organization that receives its funding from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. Established in 1963, its main activities centre around the drafting of global standards for all food products, including food supplements. The "Codex Alimentarius" is the collective name for these standards. Working as a coordinated bloc, the 27 European Union (EU) member countries – including Romania – are increasingly using Codex as a vehicle for shaping global food regulations to reflect EU law.

The World Trade Organization uses Codex Guidelines and Standards as the benchmark in the adjudication of international trade disputes involving foods. It's headquarters, above, are located in Geneva, Switzerland.
Will Codex be mandatory after 31 December 2009? Could the Romanian Parliament reject it, even though Romania is an EU member?

All of the global food standards produced by Codex are already effectively mandatory, due to the fact they are used by the World Trade Organization (WTO) as the benchmark in its adjudication of international trade disputes involving foods. The trade sanctions and huge financial costs that can result from losing such a dispute basically leave all WTO member countries with little or no option but to implement Codex standards into their national laws.

As such, the claim by some that "Codex will go into global effect on December 31, 2009" is not only untrue, but also somewhat absurd. The Codex Alimentarius already consists of over 300 official global food standards, some of which originate from as long ago as 1966.

Romania is represented at Codex meetings by officials from its National Sanitary, Veterinary and Food Safety Authority and Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. To all intents and purposes, these officials essentially take their orders from the Romanian government and the European Commission. As such, and as I will describe below, Romania and the governments of the other 26 EU countries are actively participating in the drawing up of global food standards that threaten the health and lives of the entire planet. In the vast majority of cases, however, even if they wanted to reject it, ordinary elected members of the Romanian Parliament get no significant input into this process.

How will Codex affect our health? Is it an instrument of the globalization forces? Is it a sort of vanguard of the global government? Do they intend to govern the World by controlling our food and medicines?

To all intents and purposes, Codex is now the primary political battlefield where the war is being waged over who will regulate and control the global food supply from farm to fork.

However, in addition to dealing with ordinary foods, Codex also sets global standards for: vitamin and mineral food supplements; health claims; organic foods; genetically modified (GM) foods; food labeling; advertising; food additives and residues of pesticides and veterinary drugs in foods. In all of these areas, the evidence is now inescapable that Codex is increasingly putting economic interests – and particularly those of the pharmaceutical, chemical and GM industries – before human health.

Without doubt, therefore, Codex is indeed an instrument of the forces that are promoting so-called "globalization" and a corporate-controlled global government. By controlling our access to healthy foods and safe, natural medicines, the forces behind Codex intend to control our lives.

The office of the Codex Secretariat is located in the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, in Rome, Italy, above.

Where are the headquarters of Codex?

The office of the Codex Secretariat is located in the headquarters of the FAO, in Rome, Italy.

Will Codex protect the health of consumers and the international food trade, like it claims? Should we stay silent, because Big Brother is looking after us? How? Is Big Brother a good guy this time?

The Codex Alimentarius Commission sees the interests of the international food trade as being far more important than protecting the health of consumers. This is amply illustrated by the fact that the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations provides almost 86 percent (US$7.2 million) of the annual funding of Codex, with the World Health Organization contributing a mere 14 percent (US$1.2 million).

More importantly, however, by controlling and limiting your access to safe, healthy nutritious foods and food supplements, it can be seen that ultimately Codex is primarily promoting the interests of the multi-billion euro pharmaceutical industry. To this industry, anything that promotes optimum health rather than sickness is a direct threat to its sales of patented synthetic chemical drugs.

Romanian citizens should therefore not be fooled into thinking that Codex is their friend.

We have here, nearby, a market. In this market there is a plaphar store (the old Romanian word for the stores which sell natural oils, herbs and vitamins). Even though their floorspace is small, they keep there hundreds of natural products, from FLAVIN7 (the Hungarian pure flavonoides) to Siberian Ginseng, from CoQ10 to Indian Momordica powder. Will this store be closed after December 31? What will happen then?

So long as its owners pay their taxes and continue to comply with Romanian law, this store will not be closed after December 31. As described above, this date is of no practical significance to Codex whatsoever.

In the longer term, I should stress that natural products and food supplements will not be banned completely. But certainly, without any doubt, some products will be at threat. The key danger at present is that the potencies (i.e. amounts) of vitamins and minerals in the EU could potentially be limited to very low, ineffective dosages. However, if this were to happen, many people will still probably take the same dosages that they had previously been taking by consuming a larger number of tablets/capsules. In such a situation, of course, the financial costs – to consumers who choose to do this – will be higher than previously.

But I'm not a fortune teller, and nobody – including Codex itself – knows for sure what will happen in the future. More importantly, what will almost certainly determine the outcome will be the extent to which consumers are prepared to stand up and fight to protect their right to freedom of choice. If people choose to do nothing, for example, and hope that the hard work will be done for them by others, then they can't complain if at some point in the future their favourite supplements are banned from sale.

Even if Codex will be mandatory for all of us, do you think that it will have a powerful enough control system to check every store in the world? How will this control work?

Powerful systems of governmental control can only retain their power so long as people sit back and do nothing. In other words, unless you want to live under a global dictatorship, you must do something to help bring about change.

To continue controlling our health, Codex and the EU depend upon the world's people remaining in ignorance about basic functions of the human body and natural approaches to maintaining and improving health. Realising this, I and my colleagues have recently developed an online World Health Alphabetization (WHA) course. By directing people to the WHA website www.wha-www.org you can help to end health illiteracy for yourself, your family, friends, colleagues and your community.

Of course they will force Romania (for example) to comply with their regulations, like they did with biometric passports. But what about civil society? What about the hundreds of doctors dedicated to alternative medicine, the local traditions, the remote villages, the ancient experience? Could they ignore all these?

The EU and Codex can and will ignore all of these things unless enough people act now and help to protect natural forms of medicine. Over the past decades, health care systems around the world have been taken hostage by interests that have defined human diseases as multi-billion dollar markets for their patented synthetic chemical drugs. Doctors who have dedicated themselves to practising alternative forms of medicine must therefore educate their patients not only about health, but also about the ways in which people have been misled by orthodox medicine and the things they need to do to bring about change.

To enable this to happen, I and my colleagues have developed several important websites:

www.arv-facts.com "ARV" is short for antiretroviral drugs. This class of highly toxic chemicals is promoted by the drug industry to patients with HIV-infections as "life saving." In this effort, the drug industry is using an army of lobbyists, including celebrities and even politicians, some of whom may not be aware of the scientific facts: none of these drugs has ever been shown to cure either HIV or AIDS and they are not allowed to be sold as a cure. Moreover, these toxic drugs are known to attack the immune system of patients and eventually destroy it. The ARV Facts website contains extracts from the "patient information leaflets" of these dangerous drugs, as published by the drug manufacturers themselves.

www.chemo-facts.com Cancer is a multi-billion dollar business. The drugs used in chemotherapy kill cancer cells – but they also kill healthy cells too. That fact alone is bad enough, but it doesn't stop there. The drugs used in chemotherapy also have side-effects and many cause new cancers and new diseases, leading to the use of yet more drugs which in turn have new side effects. It’s a vicious circle and a license to print money for the pharmaceutical industry. The Chemo Facts website contains extracts from the "patient information leaflets" of these chemotherapy drugs, as published by the drug manufacturers themselves.

www.cholesterol-fact.org Cholesterol-lowering drugs are the single largest business segment of the global pharmaceutical drug business. The global sales of the leading drug category – statins – have surpassed 200 billion dollars per year. This entire business is built on fear – the fear that cholesterol actually causes heart attacks. While this "cholesterol-scare" has become a gold mine for the drug companies – the economic burden of this business is ultimately carried by us, the people. Health professionals, political decision takers and hundreds of millions of patients worldwide have the right to know: What are the proven facts – and what is the fiction promoted by the multi-billion dollar investment business with patented cholesterol-lowering drugs. All of this information, and more, can be found on the Cholesterol Facts website.

www.pharma-fact.org The pharmaceutical industry portrays itself as an industry fighting to prevent and eliminate diseases but, behind the pretext of this noble cause, it is extorting billions of dollars in subsidies from dozens of governments and is demanding blind obedience from hundreds of millions of patients. As such, the Pharma Facts website describes how the pharmaceutical drug industry is not a health industry at all, but an investment business. While pretending to deliver health to the world, its entire existence is based on promoting diseases as multi-billion dollar markets for patented drugs.
Do you think that our magazine will be put in danger? What do you suggest to us to do in order to circumvent this situation? What should we tell our readers?

Nobody knows for sure what will happen in the future. That said, freedom of speech is already at threat in the EU. As with natural products and food supplements, therefore, the survival of your magazine may well be determined by the extent to which consumers are prepared to stand up and fight to protect the right to free speech. The right to free speech is one of most the important rights of all and should be protected with great care. Without free speech you cannot have democracy – and without democracy what you get is tyranny.

Fortunately, however, there are two very important things that you can do to help bring about change.

Our European Referendum Initiative (www.eu-referendum.org) is a campaign for citizens to have the right to vote in a referendum whenever significant changes to laws affecting them are made at either national or European level. Currently, its campaigns include a petition for a Europe for the People, by the People; a petition to reject the EU's so-called Lisbon Treaty; and a petition for a referendum on natural remedies. Thus far, over a quarter of a million people across Europe have signed these petitions and we now have supporters in all 27 EU countries.

The historical documents published on our EU Facts website (www.eu-facts.org) prove that the blueprint for the undemocratic "Brussels EU" originated on the drawing boards of Nazi leaders during WWII. The publication of this information marks the beginning of the end of the undemocratic experiment of the "Brussels EU." In addition, however, the EU Facts website also gives people the opportunity to participate in an online referendum against the EU's Lisbon Treaty, the aim of which is to deliver Europe once and for all into the hands of corporate interests. Under this treaty, the so-called EU Commission would be elevated to the status of a de facto European Government – without ever having been democratically elected and with no fear of ever being voted out of office. And, unlike in a democracy, the EU Parliament would have no powers to control this form of "government of commissioners". By downloading our special software program from the EU Facts website, you can email your clear No! to this undemocratic treaty to the political decision-makers of Europe.

The Codex General Guidelines on Claims prohibits claims implying that a balanced diet or ordinary foods cannot supply adequate amounts of all nutrients. However, independent studies conducted in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and many other countries show that the nutrient content of our food has fallen substantially over the past few decades.

Does Codex contravene the right to freedom of opinion and expression? Our current advertising is dedicated 95% to natural treatments. What does Codex say about advertising?

Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights states the following: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

However, through placing unwarranted restrictions upon health claims in relation to labelling and advertising, Codex standards clearly contravene these rights.

For example, there are already several Codex texts in existence that place restrictions upon the health benefits that can be attributed to foods and food supplements. Perhaps the most significant of these is the Codex General Guidelines on Claims. Adopted in 1979, and revised in 1991, these guidelines are in some senses the very root of the Codex problem – in terms of placing severe restrictions upon natural forms of healthcare – in that they effectively seek to ensure that the only products that can make claims relating to the prevention, alleviation, treatment, and cure of disease are pharmaceutical drugs.

Specifically, and amongst other things, the Codex General Guidelines on Claims prohibits the following:

Claims implying that a balanced diet or ordinary foods cannot supply adequate amounts of all nutrients.
Claims that food products (including food supplements) are suitable for use in the prevention, alleviation, treatment or cure of diseases.

These prohibitions are demonstrably unwarranted and openly disingenuous for two reasons. Firstly, independent studies conducted in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and many other countries show that the nutrient content of our food has fallen substantially over the past few decades. Secondly, there is abundant scientific evidence that micronutrients can prevent, alleviate, treat and cure disease.

As such, nobody should be in any doubt that Codex is knowingly attempting to prevent people from accessing crucial health information that could help to save millions of lives.

Codex now permits ethylene to be used for ripening organic kiwifruit and bananas. Whilst fruits do produce their own ethylene as a part of their ripening process, most consumers would consider it a monstrous lie to label food as "organic" when it has been plucked before ripe, transported thousands of miles across the world in cold storage containers filled with carbon dioxide (CO2), and then artificially treated with ethylene for ripening.

What about organic food, additive-free foods and non-GM foods?

The key danger here is that Codex has gradually been weakening the definition of the word "organic." As a result, substances now permitted for use under the Codex 'Guidelines for the Production, Processing, Marketing and Labelling of Organically Produced Foods' include sulphur dioxide, which is known to cause allergic reactions in some people; carrageenan, which has been linked with the formation of ulcers in the intestines and cancerous tumors in the gut; and ethylene, which is now permitted to be used for ripening kiwifruit and bananas. Clearly, whilst it is true that fruits do produce their own ethylene as a part of their ripening process, most consumers would consider it a monstrous lie to label food as "organic" when it has been plucked before ripe, transported thousands of miles across the world in cold storage containers filled with carbon dioxide (CO2), and then artificially treated with ethylene for ripening.

On a simple level, of course, what is happening here is that the large multinational food producers want to benefit from the higher prices that organically-labelled food fetches, but without having to go to the same trouble in producing it as do the the smaller, specialist organic farms.

On a deeper level, however, the reality is that the producers of patented GM foods see organic foods as a threat to their business model because they can't be patented. As such, there is an important parallel here with the producers of synthetic chemical drugs, who likewise see vitamins and other non-patentable natural therapies as a threat.

Significantly, therefore, some of the major players in the pharmaceutical industry are also now becoming major players in the production of GM seeds. Given that in many cases these same companies also produce artificial food additives and synthetic chemical pesticides – both of which, because they don't exist in nature, are patentable – it can be seen that the pharmaceutical and chemical industries' control over our health is now deeper than most people would ever have considered imaginable.



Paul Anthony Taylor was interviewed by Ion Longin Popescu.

KAREN SAWYER'S BOOK, 'THE DANGEROUS MAN' TO BE RELEASED IN FEBRUARY 2010

I was a bit stunned when noted UK author Karen Sawyer (Soul Companions, et al) approached me about appearing in her new book The Dangerous Man, which will be released in February 2010. Stunned because I already owned a copy of her stellar book,Soul Companions, a book that impressed me deeply.

The Dangerous Man title is inspired by Thomas Merton, who wrote "The most dangerous man in the world is the contemplative who is guided by nobody. He trusts his own visions." I will be appearing at Karen's "Gathering of Dangerous Men" next February in the UK.


The Dangerous Man: Conversations with Free-Thinkers and Truth-Seekers – A Collection of Alternative Research
by Karen Sawyer
To be published in 2010 by O Books
ISBN: 978-1-84694-345-4

On this planet, there exists a diverse range of individuals – of all ages, cultures and beliefs – who have the potential to transform ‘life as we know it’ for the better. It is time for us to make informed decisions not only for ourselves, but for the future generations that follow. The informed spiritual individual is a powerful force to be reckoned with indeed…
On a quest for truth, Karen Sawyer interviewed 32 of the most brilliant and controversial minds of our time, including; David Icke, Michael Tsarion, Bruce Lipton, Cleve Backster, Ralph Ellis, Jerry E Smith, Mary Croft, Kevin P. Miller, John Perkins, Peter Taylor, Ian R Crane, Winston Shrout, Michael Cremo, Ellis C Taylor, Jonathan Goldman, and Alan Wilson.

The result is a curious combination of mystery, anomaly, and occult secrets among fascinating research and insights within history, science, commerce and law, the environment and much more.

“A potpouri of hope for all our futures. Please read this and sense the wonders of freedom.”
- David Bellamy

“The most dangerous mind is one that thinks for itself. This is a book to inspire the type of bravery needed to do just that.”
- David Southwell, author of Secrets & Lies and Conspiracy Files

“The most complete guide to what free-thinking is all about. A true ‘red pill’, which only looks like a book.”
- Paul Bondarovski, The Dot Connector magazine.

“What is genuine, what is a lie? What is real and what is false? In this remarkably incisive and honest work, the author, Karen Sawyer, in a series of fascinating interviews peels away the choking layers of disinformation, half truths and downright lies that have, almost since time began, been presented as absolute truth by those who choose to retain their grasp on power, and in some cases the nature of reality itself, by any means at their disposal. What is written here will entertain, shock, enrage and amaze in equal part, but ultimately it is a source of hope and I thoroughly recommend it to all who seek the truth.”
- Brian J Allan, paranormal investigator, researcher, and author of The Heretics, Can We Now Explain The Unexplainable

To pre-order the book e-mail: dangerousman@arcconvention.org. For information about the forthcoming ARC Convention on 20th - 21st February 2010, which will bring together some of the most brilliant and controversial minds of our time, contact: info@arcconvention.org. The website for both the book and ARC conventions is at: www.arcconvention.org.

LEAKED LETTER REVEALS 25 DEATHS DUE TO H1N1 VACCINE; FEARS OF 'DEADLY NERVE DISORDER' REAL, SAY NEUROLOGISTS

A warning that the new swine flu jab is linked to a deadly nerve disease has been sent by the Government to senior neurologists in a confidential letter.

The letter from the Health Protection Agency, the official body that oversees public health, has been leaked to The Mail on Sunday, leading to demands to know why the information has not been given to the public before the vaccination of millions of people, including children, begins.

It tells the neurologists that they must be alert for an increase in a brain disorder called Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), which could be triggered by the vaccine.

GBS attacks the lining of the nerves, causing paralysis and inability to breathe, and can be fatal.

The letter, sent to about 600 neurologists on July 29, is the first sign that there is concern at the highest levels that the vaccine itself could cause serious complications.

It refers to the use of a similar swine flu vaccine in the United States in 1976 when:

More people died from the vaccination than from swine flu.
500 cases of GBS were detected.
The vaccine may have increased the risk of contracting GBS by eight times.
The vaccine was withdrawn after just ten weeks when the link with GBS became clear.
The US Government was forced to pay out millions of dollars to those affected.
Concerns have already been raised that the new vaccine has not been sufficiently tested and that the effects, especially on children, are unknown.

It is being developed by pharmaceutical companies and will be given to about 13million people during the first wave of immunisation, expected to start in October.

Top priority will be given to everyone aged six months to 65 with an underlying health problem, pregnant women and health professionals.

The British Neurological Surveillance Unit (BNSU), part of the British Association of Neurologists, has been asked to monitor closely any cases of GBS as the vaccine is rolled out.

One senior neurologist said last night: ‘I would not have the swine flu jab because of the GBS risk.’

There are concerns that there could be a repeat of what became known as the ‘1976 debacle’ in the US, where a swine flu vaccine killed 25 people – more than the virus itself.

A mass vaccination was given the go-ahead by President Gerald Ford because scientists believed that the swine flu strain was similar to the one responsible for the 1918-19 pandemic, which killed half a million Americans and 20million people worldwide.

The swine flu vaccine being offered to children has not been tested on infants

Within days, symptoms of GBS were reported among those who had been immunised and 25 people died from respiratory failure after severe paralysis. One in 80,000 people came down with the condition. In contrast, just one person died of swine flu.

More than 40million Americans had received the vaccine by the time the programme was stopped after ten weeks. The US Government paid out millions of dollars in compensation to those affected.

The swine flu virus in the new vaccine is a slightly different strain from the 1976 virus, but the possibility of an increased incidence of GBS remains a concern.

Shadow health spokesman Mike Penning said last night: ‘The last thing we want is secret letters handed around experts within the NHS. We need a vaccine but we also need to know about potential risks.

‘Our job is to make sure that the public knows what’s going on. Why
is the Government not being open about this? It’s also very worrying if GPs, who will be administering the vaccine, aren’t being warned.’

Two letters were posted together to neurologists advising them of the concerns. The first, dated July 29, was written by Professor Elizabeth Miller, head of the HPA’s Immunisation Department.

It says: ‘The vaccines used to combat an expected swine influenza pandemic in 1976 were shown to be associated with GBS and were withdrawn from use.

‘GBS has been identified as a condition needing enhanced surveillance when the swine flu vaccines are rolled out.

‘Reporting every case of GBS irrespective of vaccination or disease history is essential for conducting robust epidemiological analyses capable of identifying whether there is an increased risk of GBS in defined time periods after vaccination, or after influenza itself, compared with the background risk.’

The second letter, dated July 27, is from the Association of British Neurologists and is written by Dr Rustam Al-Shahi Salman, chair of its surveillance unit, and Professor Patrick Chinnery, chair of its clinical research committee.

Halted: The 1976 US swine flu campaign

It says: ‘Traditionally, the BNSU has monitored rare diseases for long periods of time. However, the swine influenza (H1N1) pandemic has overtaken us and we need every member’s involvement with a new BNSU survey of Guillain-Barre Syndrome that will start on August 1 and run for approximately nine months.

‘Following the 1976 programme of vaccination against swine influenza in the US, a retrospective study found a possible eight-fold increase in the incidence of GBS.

‘Active prospective ascertainment of every case of GBS in the UK is required. Please tell BNSU about every case.

‘You will have seen Press coverage describing the Government’s concern about releasing a vaccine of unknown safety.’

If there are signs of a rise in GBS after the vaccination programme begins, the Government could decide to halt it.

GBS attacks the lining of the nerves, leaving them unable to transmit signals to muscles effectively.

It can cause partial paralysis and mostly affects the hands and feet. In serious cases, patients need to be kept on a ventilator, but it can be fatal.

Death is caused by paralysis of the respiratory system, causing the victim to suffocate. It is not known exactly what causes GBS and research on the subject has been inconclusive.

However, it is thought that one in a million people who have a seasonal flu vaccination could be at risk and it has also been linked to people recovering from a bout of flu of any sort.

The HPA said it was part of the Government’s pandemic plan to monitor GBS cases in the event of a mass vaccination campaign, regardless of the strain of flu involved.
But vaccine experts warned that the letters proved the programme was a ‘guinea-pig trial’.

Dr Tom Jefferson, co-ordinator of the vaccines section of the influential Cochrane Collaboration, an independent group that reviews research, said: ‘New vaccines never behave in the way you expect them to. It may be that there is a link to GBS, which is certainly not something I would wish on anybody.

‘But it could end up being anything because one of the additives in one of the vaccines is a substance called squalene, and none of the studies we’ve extracted have any research on it at all.’

He said squalene, a naturally occurring enzyme, could potentially cause so-far-undiscovered side effects.

Jackie Fletcher, founder of vaccine support group Jabs, said: ‘The Government would not be anticipating this if they didn’t think there was a connection. What we’ve got is a massive guinea-pig trial.’

Professor Chinnery said: ‘During the last swine flu pandemic, it was observed that there was an increased frequency of cases of GBS. No one knows whether it was the virus or the vaccine that caused this.

‘The purpose of the survey is for us to assess rapidly whether there is an increase in the frequency of GBS when the vaccine is released in the UK. It also increases consultants’ awareness of the condition.

Panic over? The number of swine flu cases has fallen sharply in the past few weeks

‘This is a belt-and-braces approach to safety and is not something people should be substantially worried about as it’s a rare condition.’

If neurologists do identify a case of GBS, it will be logged on a central database.

Details about patients, including blood samples, will be collected and monitored by the HPA.

It is hoped this will help scientists establish why some people develop the condition and whether it is directly related to the vaccine.

But some question why there needs to be a vaccine, given the risks. Dr Richard Halvorsen, author of The Truth About Vaccines, said: ‘For people with serious underlying health problems, the risk of dying from swine flu is probably greater than the risk of side effects from the vaccine.

‘But it would be tragic if we repeated the US example and ended up with more casualties from the jabs.

‘I applaud the Government for recognising the risk but in most cases this is a mild virus which needs a few days in bed. I’d question why we need a vaccine at all.’

Professor Miller at the HPA said: ‘This monitoring system activates pandemic plans that have been in place for a number of years. We’ll be able to get information on whether a patient has had a prior influenza illness and will look at whether influenza itself is linked to GBS.

‘We are not expecting a link to the vaccine but a link to disease, which would make having the vaccine even more important.’

The UK’s medicines watchdog, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, is already monitoring reported side effects from Tamiflu and Relenza and it is set to extend that surveillance to the vaccine.

A Department of Health spokesperson said: ‘The European Medicines Agency has strict processes in place for licensing pandemic vaccines.

‘In preparing for a pandemic, appropriate trials to assess safety and the immune responses have been carried out on vaccines very similar to the swine flu vaccine. The vaccines have been shown to have a good safety profile.

‘It is extremely irresponsible to suggest that the UK would use a vaccine without careful consideration of safety issues. The UK has one of the most successful immunisation programmes in the world.’

I COULDN''T EAT OR SPEAK... IT WAS HORRENDOUS

Victim: Hilary Wilkinson spent three months in hospital after she was diagnosed with Guillain-Barre Syndrome
When Hilary Wilkinson woke up with muscle weakness in her left arm and difficulty breathing, doctors initially put it down to a stroke.

But within hours, she was on a ventilator in intensive care after being diagnosed with Guillain-Barre Syndrome.

She spent three months in hospital and had to learn how to talk and walk again. But at times, when she was being fed through a drip and needed a tracheotomy just to breathe, she doubted whether she would survive.

The mother of two, 57, from Maryport, Cumbria, had been in good health until she developed a chest infection in March 2006. She gradually became so weak she could not walk downstairs.

Doctors did not diagnose Guillain-Barre until her condition worsened in hospital and tests showed her reflexes slowing down. It is impossible for doctors to know how she contracted the disorder, although it is thought to be linked to some infections.

Mrs Wilkinson said: ‘It was very scary. I couldn’t eat and I couldn’t speak. My arms and feet had no strength and breathing was hard.

I was treated with immunoglobulin, which are proteins found in blood, to stop damage to my nerves. After ten days, I still couldn’t speak and had to mime to nurses or my family.

‘It was absolutely horrendous and I had no idea whether I would get through it. You reach very dark moments at such times and wonder how long it can last.

But I’m a very determined person and I had lots of support.’

After three weeks, she was transferred to a neurological ward, where she had an MRI scan and nerve tests to assess the extent of the damage.

Still unable to speak and in a wheelchair, Mrs Wilkinson eventually began gruelling physiotherapy to improve her muscle strength and movement but it was exhausting and painful.

Three years later, she is almost fully recovered. She can now walk for several miles at a time, has been abroad and carries out voluntary work for a GBS Support Group helpline.

She said: ‘It makes me feel wary that the Government is rolling out this vaccine without any clear idea of the GBS risk, if any. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone and it certainly changed my life.

‘I’m frightened to have the swine flu vaccine if this might happen again – it’s a frightening illness and I think more research needs to be done on the effect of the vaccine.’

Hotline staff given access to confidential records

Confidential NHS staff records and disciplinary complaints could be accessed by hundreds of workers manning the Government’s special swine flu hotline.

They were able to browse through a database of emails containing doctors’ and nurses’ National Insurance numbers, home addresses, dates of birth, mobile phone numbers and scanned passport pages – all details that could be used fraudulently.

And private and confidential complaints sent by hospitals about temporary medical staff – some of whom were named – were also made available to the call-centre workers, who were given a special password to log in to an internal NHS website.

It could be a breach of the Data Protection Act.

The hotline staff work for NHS Professionals, which was set up using taxpayers’ money to employ temporary medical and administrative staff for the health service.

The not-for-profit company runs two of the Government’s swine flu call centres – with 300 staff in Farnborough, Hampshire, and 900 in Watford, Hertfordshire.

Shadow Health Secretary Andrew Lansley described the revelations as ‘disturbing’.

Anne Mitchell, a spokeswoman for Unison, said: ‘There’s no excuse for such a fundamental breach of personal security. Action needs to be taken as soon as possible to make sure this does not happen again.’

A spokeswoman for NHS Professionals would not confirm whether access to the confidential files had been granted.




SOURCE:
By JO MACFARLANE
Daily Maily Online-UK

Generation RX Trailer 'Facts'

While I am away researching and preparing for a new film...here are some 'Trailer Facts.'

GREIDER: President Makes 'Outrageous Concession' in $80 Billion Deal With Big Pharma

By William Greider
The Nation

So now we know why the president wants everyone to make nice in the healthcare debate. His White House has cut a deal with Big Pharma that smells like the same old rotten politics that candidate Obama regularly denounced and promised to end. The drug industry agrees to deliver $80 billion in future savings and the president promises the government will not use its awesome purchasing power to negotiate lower drug prices.

Wow. This is roughly the same deal that George W. Bush cut with the drug makers when he was legislating Medicare's new coverage of drug purchases. It is the same bargain that Democrats in Congress universally condemned as wasteful and corrupt. The deal does not smell any better now that a Democratic president is embracing it.

In effect, Obama wants to give away one of the principal objectives of strong reform. The details were spelled out in today's New York Times and revealed by Big Pharma's top-dog lobbyist, Billy Tauzin, a former Republican congressman who leads the industry association. Tauzin called it a "rock-solid deal," and the White House did not dispute as much. But that is not the last word.

People who believe in real healthcare reform should not be nice about this. They must rise up and rebel against our popular new president's outrageous concession. They must demand that Congress declare the private deal-making null and void. If Congress lacks the nerve to do this, then this exercise in reform begins to look more and more like previous attempts that were eviscerated by the clout of the corporate interests.

The fate of healthcare reform may depend not on the Senate or the White House but on Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives. What prompted Billy Tauzin to spill the beans on his deal-making with White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel was the House measure that specifies government's right to bargain for lower prices. No, no, no! Tauzin said. We've got a deal with the president, who says that won't be allowed.

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi simply responds that the House is not bound by any deals made with the Senate or the White House. Her caucus must back up her words. They should pass the House bill, which will allow the government to do what any major customer would do in the same circumstances -- use its leverage to demand lower prices.

If House Democrats stand their ground, then they will force a debate they can win with the American public. President Obama will have to choose between standing with the drug manufacturers or defending the original purpose of healthcare reform.

William Greider is the author of, most recently, "Come Home, America: The Rise and Fall (and Redeeming Promise) of Our Country (Rodale Books, 2009)."

© 2009 The Nation All rights reserved.

London Free Press: 'GENERATION RX REVEALS MEDICATION'S DARK SIDE'

By KATHY RUMLESKI, FREE PRESS REPORTER

A film that documents the effects of children's psychotic drugs and how these drugs can lead to a host of serious problems, will be shown at the Hyland Cinema tonight.

Generation Rx, by filmmaker Kevin P. Miller, follows families who have lost children to suicide and how lives have been affected by medications. There are also interviews with doctors about the consequences of prescribing mind-altering drugs to children.

The documentary is presented at Hyland by Maximized Living and London doctor B.J. Hardick.

"It's a wakeup call for people who don't realize the politics behind getting these drugs approved and the politics behind naming new psychiatric conditions that come out every year without any real scientific testing," Hardick says.

"The realities of prescription drug side effects are also in the news right now with Michael Jackson. We think this is an extreme case, but there are many people walking around in this city taking as many drugs as Michael Jackson was that are prescribed."

Hardick says there is collusion between the pharmaceutical companies and drug regulators in North America.

"The companies have been backing a lot of the research and creating disease names."

The documentary reveals eight out of the 12 school shooters since the Columbine massacre were taking psychotropic medication.

The documentary has created a stir at film festivals.

Academy award winner and London native Paul Haggis called it a "chilling eye-opener. Many of the stories stayed with me weeks after viewing and continue to haunt me now."

Generation Rx has been met with resistance by drug companies and individuals.

Hardick hopes the documentary will help steer families away from unnecessary medications.

"We've done this as a public awareness campaign," he says.

Proceeds from tickets sales will benefit Teen Challenge, a local residential drug rehab program.

---

IF YOU GO

What: Screening of Generation Rx, a documentary exploring the dangers of children's psychiatric medications and their use.

When: Tonight, 7 to 9 p.m.

Where: The Hyland Cinema, 240 Wharncliffe Rd. S.

Tickets: $4, at the door or by calling 519-673-1132.

1976 PROPAGANDA - SWINE FLU - PART I

Before the government even ATTEMPTS to vaccinate every man, woman, and child, it is important to look back at the Hell wrought by the supposed Swine Flu vaccine in 1976.

Here's Part 1 0f 3 from CBS' "60 Minutes" program. This segment aired once — and unusually, never repeated, even during the season of reruns.

REBORN ON THE 4TH OF JULY

MY BROTHER CHRIS WAS A ROYAL PAIN when I was growing up. He and his friends taunted me incessantly when I was little, and as the next sibling above me in the Miller food chain, he made sure I knew that he was the boss.

I could go on and on about the childhood traumas: he pushed me in a pile of dog manure; he broke a neighbor’s window with a baseball — and then blamed me; and once, he even poked me in the eye with a stick. When my Mom brought me home from the hospital, Chris tried to tell me how cool I looked with a patch over my eye, to avoid getting in any further trouble.

“You look like a PIRATE,” he exclaimed with all of the thespian might he could muster.

“The patch is WHITE,” I replied angrily. “Have you ever seen a pirate with a WHITE eye patch?”

He just smiled.

Chris knew that his bullying had to end soon, but he persisted for as long as he could. He had an eerie knack for stopping his evil acts just before being caught-in-the-act by mom. By the time she walked around the corner, his little devil-face would magically transform — and his cherubic demeanor would miraculously re-appear.

God, I hated that.

By the time I was 13, however, I was growing — rapidly. I had developed a far more athletic build than Chris, and suddenly, we were the same size.

The era of being the taunted sibling had come to a close.

CHRIS’ LAST ACT OF CHICANERY came on July 4, 1969 when he stole my brand new outfit: a pair of black bell-bottom pants and a new striped pullover shirt. As I prepared to leave for the Independence Day fireworks at Lakewood Park outside of Cleveland, I noticed that my sweet new clothes were missing.

Chris had somehow slipped into my clothes, slipped out of the door and was long gone.

I’m sure I cursed at him under my breath — and I know for certain that I created quite a stir with my Mom about the injustice of it all — but the bottom line was that I would have to leave for the fireworks without my spiffy new outfit. So I stopped by a friend’s house and we began our walk to Lakewood Park a few miles away.

TEENAGE ANGST AND ALL, my friend Robin and I were looking forward to the fireworks. Lakewood had developed into a huge inner-ring suburb and was full of kids — and the 4th of July fireworks were always spectacular. It had been a picturesque day and we were really looking forward to the evening.

When we were about five minutes from Lakewood Park, the sky turned from beautiful sunshine to jet-black — in less than two minutes’ time. Without notice, Robin and I were suddenly caught in the grip of the most furious storm either of us had ever experienced. Make no mistake, we were scared to death. Trees were snapping all around us. Huge tree limbs were being flung with unfathomable force. So much rain drenched us that we were shivering, and the temperature felt like it had dropped by twenty degrees in just a few minutes time.

And then there were the power lines. . .live electrical power lines that buzzed and danced in the flooded streets.

It was the storm that changed everything.

It took about an hour to get home, as Robin and I made our way through a jungle of downed trees and flooded roads in the darkness. Lakewood — and indeed all of Cleveland was without electrical power. We saw dozens of cars smashed by trees, windows blown out of businesses and even a few people injured by flying debris.

When I finally walked in the door, my Mom and Dad gave me the look of joy and relief that only a parent can truly understand. The living room of our humble home was lit by flickering candles, but it was easy to see how grateful my parents were to see me. The transistor radio was on — and was reporting the bad news: 100 mph winds had slammed into Cleveland and Lakewood with brutal force; people had died, including some who had been electrocuted by power lines like the ones Robin and I had dodged. Scores were injured; hundreds were missing on Lake Erie — and the hospitals, all on emergency power, were under a terrible strain.

As I began to recount my saga to my family, the phone rang.

It was Lakewood Hospital—my brother Chris was in the emergency room. My parents rushed to the car and somehow made it to the hospital, despite the trees and the power lines and the flooded streets. When they phoned a few hours later they told us point blank: “Chris is in critical condition — a priest has given him his last rites — and and it doesn’t look like he is going to make it.”

Sobbing uncontrollably, I ran to the darkness of my bedroom and began to pray. . .and pray. . .and pray. “If you let him live, Lord,” I said, “I will never fight with him again. I-WILL-NEVER-FIGHT-WITH-HIM-AGAIN.” I repeated this mantra hundreds of times, begging and pleading and crying all the while.

Over the coming hours and days we learned that a tree that was over four feet in diameter had hit Chris, and discovered that the very same tree that had struck my brother so violently had killed the sister of one of my classmates.

We learned of the heroism of volunteers and emergency workers who risked their own safety to free my brother — who had been trapped in the middle of the tree after it splintered around him. And we learned that once Chris had been freed from the clutches of the tree how the volunteers and ER workers carried him to a makeshift triage in a garage nearby the Park in an attempt to save his life.

Today is the 40th anniversary of that day.

On the 30th Anniversary I drove to Lakewood Park before all of the festivities began — and just sat quietly. Then I picked up the phone and dialed.

I told the person on the other end that thirty years prior I had made a promise to God—that if he would spare the life of my brother that I would not fight with him—ever again.

“It’s been thirty years,” I said. “And do you realize that we’ve never had so much as a disagreement?”

On the other end of the phone, my brother Chris sobbed. Since the accident, his life has been one of unbelievable twists and turns — of challenges and faith — and of real-life drama.

But forty years later I am happy to report that God did indeed answer my prayers — on that night when the storm changed everything.

And that’s what the 4th of July means to me.

NOT IN MY BACKYARD

DURING THE 1980s, somewhere between working in the music business and becoming a documentary filmmaker, I thrashed around and tried to make a living by producing corporate and non-profit films.

It wasn’t meant to be. We were in the Reagan years; it was supposedly “morning in America” again — but it sure didn’t feel like it, at least to me.

I recall making a presentation to produce a video for a national group of chemical recyclers whose collective aim was to re-use chemical solvents that had become a part of every day life. The chemicals were cleaning agents used at the local dry cleaner and the corner gas station — and people seemed to be becoming aware that it was better for all if the solvents could be recycled.

There was a chemical plant in a Cleveland neighborhood that wanted to expand its’ operation to meet the needs of this relatively young but environmentally-conscious industry. I tried to sell the group on the need for a short film about what I perceived to be the honorable goals of the company and the real need for its services. The video would address — upfront — the potential safety concerns of neighbors, and explain why the company would be a steward of not only this new environmental activism, but of good jobs for area residents.

I presented my 13-page assessment and proposal — full of Kevin Miller’s idealism — gave a speech to the Board, and waited. A week later the chairman phoned to tell me how much they loved the idea. “We are so impressed with your research,” I recall him saying. “How did you find all of this stuff?” Later, however, he said, “we’re gonna have to pass on doing this right now. We’re not sure it’s a good idea to raise the sceptre of safety if we don’t have to.”

I thanked him for his kind words but politely challenged his conclusions. “You’ve heard of NIMBY, right?” I asked the Chairman. “NIMBY — Not In My Backyard? If you don’t state your case directly to the public, your neighbors will see no value in your recycling efforts — and eventually, fear will rule, as it always does.”

Sure enough, six months later, the neighbors said “not in my backyard” and reacted, well, fearfully. City Council rejected the expansion plan.

The company went out of business in the 1990s.

I was reminded of this because of two separate but unrelated news stories that cropped up in the news of late. One story dealt with the trends in Massachusetts and Ohio where people were crying “NIMBY” over proposed wind turbines. The other — across Lake Erie on the shores of the Canadian province of Ontario — explained proposals to add a nuclear power facility in Canada.

The Great Lakes are home to the largest body of fresh water in the world. It has been said that if you stood on the moon, you would instantly recognize the enormity of the Great Lakes: Superior, Michigan, Huron, Ontario and Erie. Covering more than 94,000 square miles, these “freshwater seas” hold “an estimated 6 quadrillion gallons of water, or about one-fifth of the world's fresh surface water supply,” according to the Great Lakes Information Center. In the U.S. alone, these magnificent lakes account for about nine-tenths of the U.S. supply of fresh surface water.

So the idea that another nuclear power plant could surface on Lake Erie — there are already three — should scare the daylights out of everyone. Both the Davis-Besse and Perry Nuclear Power Plants are located adjacent to Lake Erie, and in Michigan, the Fermi II plant is located next to Lake Erie near the city of Monroe.

There have already been two near catastrophes at Davis-Besse. According to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the plant was responsible for “two of the top five most dangerous nuclear incidents in the United States” since 1979.

So when people say, “not in my backyard” to wind turbines on Lake Erie, have they considered that just one catastrophe on Lake Erie could contaminate up to one-fifth of the world’s fresh water supply?

I sure have.

If your ‘backyard’ is Lake Erie — everyone should embrace the future — now. We should do it before Ontario puts a fourth nuclear power plant on the shores of this — the most shallow of all of the Great Lakes — and we should employ some vision, for God’s sake! Estimates from a 2004 Renewable Energy Policy Project (REPP) report states that 12,000 wind-industry jobs could be created in Ohio, a region decimated by the loss of manufacturing jobs. That is second only to California!

For once, we should follow the lead of the innovative visionaries in Holland who have not only embraced wind farms, but also other innovative environmental solutions.

We need to take the leap — and accelerate the development of renewable energy on the shores of Lake Erie and the Great Lakes as a whole.

In Ohio, Michigan, and the Midwest, millions are out of work. The fear of losing it all is beginning to hit home. In that context, this NIMBY over wind turbines just doesn’t work anymore —especially with a fourth nuclear power plant on Lake Erie's horizon.

People need jobs. We need power. The future of power generation in the Midwest is there for the taking. We can shift to wind power and push nuclear away from the shores of our Great Lakes.

It is irresponsible to not act.



#
PHOTO CREDIT: Thomas Ondrey - The Cleveland Plain Dealer

AN EPITAPH FOR FATHER'S DAY

I MISS SPEAKING TO MY DAD. There were so many times, over a thirty-year period when I would call him just to hear the sound of his voice.

Of course, I never told him that, but it is true.

My dad was a Southern gentleman: raised Baptist; a convert to Catholicism; conservative to the core. He was, without a doubt, the most ethical man I’ve ever known. He would never associate with anyone or anything he deemed ‘shady’ or unethical. And if he caught wind of one of his children doing so, there would be Hell to pay.

As the second last of seven children, my relationship to my dad seemed different. As a writer, I often challenged his notions of how the world worked — and recall some short stories and articles I wrote in high school that must have put Dad in a terrible quandary — and made him uncertain how to react.

To his credit, he never once forbade me from writing about any subject, no matter how uncomfortable it made him feel. He could have done so — and I believe I would have honored his command.

But he did not interfere, sensing that this was who I was born to be: an artist, ‘agitator,’ of sorts, a mirror for society. . .a writer.

In February 2007, I was engulfed by Generation RX. The call came on a Sunday that he was lapsing in and out of consciousness and that it wouldn’t be long before he would die. It took me about 10-12 hours to process that, as I was rather numb upon hearing the news.

During my flight from Cleveland to Boise 36 hours later, however, I had plenty of time to sort through our many years of physical separation and replayed many of the events of my childhood. The nuggets I re-discovered have been applied — successfully or not — to my life as a single Dad.

AT 35,000 FEET, I thought a lot about how affectionate I had been with my father. I sat on his lap and watched TV — far beyond the point of being a young child. By the time I was 13, I think, he FINALLY threw me off his lap. I was already taller than Dad’s 5’9” frame — and I’m pretty sure that I already weighed more than him also.

It took him months to enforce his new law for good, however, and something tells me he realized that I was the end of the line of Miller boys — and that like me, he wanted to relish every moment before I, too, was grown up and gone.

Most of my elder siblings say that my incessant, outward expressions of love for my dad simply “broke him down” over the years, and stripped away any remaining veneer of what were “appropriate” displays of emotions.

I, on the other hand, have always asserted that my poor old Dad was just worn out after five children — and by the time he got to me, his personal “Berlin Wall” had fallen.

The truth probably lies somewhere in between, but one thing seems certain: Dad realized somewhere along the line that no two children are alike — and that there is no “formula” for success.

WHEN I ARRIVED IN BOISE, my Mom led me to their bedroom, and forewarned me that Dad had not opened his eyes for nearly 24 hours. He had suffered another stroke and was unable to speak.

I got down on my knees, at eye-level with my father, who was turned on his side.

“Dad,” I said softly. “It’s Kevin. . .I am here.”

And Dad opened one eye. . .a final ‘miracle,’ of sorts.

Tears filled his one opened eye. Mine too. The Prodigal Son had returned. . . in time to see him off to the next realm.

Over the next 24 hours, I whispered to my Dad and spoke to him for hours, even though he never again opened his eyes. I told him what a good father he was; how proud I was to be his son, and more. I thanked him for allowing me to be the creative spirit I had become — even when it threatened him — and I thanked him for being the best Dad on the planet.

I told him it was okay to let go — his shift was over. . .his time here well-spent — his impact undeniable — his suffering complete.

Within a few hours, he was gone.

There is so much more I’d like to tell you about my Dad: that he played minor league baseball with the Phillies before the war, that he adored my Mom for well over a half-century; that he lived a good and productive life. But those will have to wait for another day.

Because now, I’m going to breakfast with my own sons — to make new memories — ones I pray they recall with fondness at a ripe old age.

Happy Father’s Day.

George Noory Interviews Kevin P. Miller on Coast to Coast AM (part 1 of 3)

George Noory Interviews Kevin P. Miller on Coast to Coast AM. This is part 1 of 3 — parts 2 and 3 are posted below.

Coast to Coast AM - Jun 11 2009 - Generation Rx part 2/3

George Noory Interviews Kevin P. Miller on Coast to Coast AM part 2 of 3

Coast to Coast AM - Jun 11, 2009 - Generation Rx part 3/3

part 3 of 3

WE'RE GOIN' COAST-TO-COAST

LIFE IS GOOD. Yes, that's right, ladies and gentlemen — you heard it here first.

Because it's not every day I get to announce that I will be a guest on COAST TO COAST A.M. with the esteemed host of hosts, George Noory. We will be discussing GENERATION RX, the media, the Food and Drug Administration, and a bevy of other issues.

PLEASE TUNE IN THURSDAY EVENING at 10pm Pacific/1 am Eastern time. You can find the radio affiliate in your town by going to:

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/affiliates

RONEN LEVI YITZCHAK SEGAL, R.I.P.

ON APRIL 10th, JUST TWO WEEKS BEFORE HIS DEATH, I posted what I termed "an insightful film review" by Ronen Levi Yitzchak Segal of New York City.

The words spoke volumes about GENERATION RX, to be sure, bu also about the kind of man Ronen was. We first met online, as is the case with so many relationships nowadays, and I was so impressed by Ronen that within the first conversation I asked him if I could send him a copy of my film, which had just been released.

Here's another of Ronen's video commentaries, where he counsels a friend after losing a parent. I think it really represent what a kind man he was — the gentle soul whom many admired.

In our last conversation, Ronen said that he was making plans to host a special screening for GENERATION RX in New York City. He was "convinced that Generation RX has the power to change" people's attitudes about drugging children — and he wanted his friends and family — and fellow New Yorkers to take notice.

I am saddened that we never got to coordinate that event: not, of course, to publicize my film, but because I was looking forward to meeting this man, whom I sensed was a good and brave and kind person, above all.

Shalom, brother. You will live in my heart forever.

GRADUATION DAY

IT MAY SOUND TIRED OR TRITE, but it is true nonetheless: when our children are young, we don’t fully grasp what it will be like when they finally walk across the stage and graduate from high school. Graduation Day is the event that compares most closely to a rite of passage — and while it pales in comparison to the indigenous experience, it’s truly all we have.

My eldest son sat with me last evening as he prepared for the big day, and we reminisced together: I, about goofy events from his childhood and he, oddly, about a story I’d shared from my own high school graduation many moons ago.

This art of “just being,” together in the same space is something we’ve done often. It’s been fifteen years since my divorce, but thankfully, we’ve spent many thousands of hours together relishing one another’s company.

As I’ve made my way through life as a single Dad, I’ve attempted to cherish each moment, amid crises and joy. Often I’ve struggled and failed, but try I do.

SEVEN YEARS AGO, the boy in the photo loved baseball more than anything. It was his life, it seemed. Today, it’s music and politics, computers and friends.

Next year — who knows? But one thing is for certain: I will never take any of it for granted.

Yesterday, I spoke with Mathy Milling Downing, who appeared in GENERATION RX. Her daughter Candace would have been graduating this week also — and it would have been her 18th birthday, had it not been for the tragic circumstances surrounding her death. Dosed with Zoloft, as the film tells, this beautiful child of 11 years old hanged herself in the Downing’s garage — a mere hour after sitting on her father’s lap watching Animal Planet on TV.

Mathy and Andy Downing — and their daughter Caroline are heroes of mine. They have fought through the pain and endured to become powerful advocates for “informed choice.” They have armed millions of others with the essential information they need about SSRIs like Zoloft, Paxil, and Prozac. Caroline wants to become a journalist and filmmaker…and she is already in college pursuing those goals. Her parents are justifiably proud.

I told Mathy that as my son's graduation takes place this afternoon, I will be prayerful and full of gratitude. As she obviously knows better than I, we can never take these milestones lightly.

I love and adore my son — and I will surely be ‘misty’ today. I taught him to tie his shoes — and to tie a tie. I helped him to bat — and to combat narrow thinking.

This is his day.

But I will also be cognizant of my friend Mathy’s void — and recognize that she was unable to see both of her daughters walk across the stage.

As obvious as it seems, maybe we need to strip things down to the bare essentials — and give thanks for the basics on this day. After all, our blessed time with them as they’ve grown, the love we’ve shared, our rembrances of happy times in their childhood — are these not the building blocks of life?

Since life holds no guarantees for any of us — no matter how preciously we view it — shouldn’t we strip things down to the core?

Candace Downing lives on. Her life’s story — and her tragic death affect even the most hardened among us. In Generation RX, the story surrounding her suicide is simply stunning — and I’ve witnessed masses weep at the injustice of it all.

In the strangest of twists, Candace has already graduated — and is already teaching all of us.

Perhaps you too, have a son or daughter who will graduate this weekend — and pass the first major test of life.

As my son walks across the stage today, though, I’m sure I will shed a tear — out of my love and pride for him — and for Candace Downing — and others like her.

Peace to you this day.

WHEN THE BRAVE FOUGHT THE MIGHTY 毋忘六四

It was 20 years ago today when the Brave Fought the Mighty.

Today, I am Thinking of Tiananmen.

We Should Never Forget...Or We Risk Suffering The Same Fate Some Day.

Please Watch This Powerful Video

~ KPM

A GIANT LEAVES US: ABRAM HOFFER, 1917-2009

Abram Hoffer, Canadian orthomolecular psychiatrist and researcher, friend of Linus Pauling, Ph.D, and editor of the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, died in Victoria, British Columbia on Wednesday, May 27 after a brief illness and a long, healthy, productive and brilliant life.

He was 92.

In a release announcing the death of Dr. Hoffer, the Alliance for Natural Health said, "He and his co-workers are credited with discoveries about the therapeutic uses of vitamins, which are the roots of orthomolecular psychiatry and medicine as it is known today. They were also the first doctors in North America to conduct double-blind controlled tests in psychiatry, and were later the first to recognise and to publish its many defects and flaws."

Born November 11, 1917 on a farm in Hoffer, Saskatchewan, Abram Hoffer attended a one-room schoolhouse and studied on horseback, eventually graduating from the University of Saskatchewan (BSA, MSA), the University of Minnesota (PhD in nutrition) and the University of Toronto (MD). He specialized in psychiatry and was, for many years, director of psychiatric research for the Saskatchewan Department of Public Health and associate professor of medicine at the University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon. In these capacities he carried out groundbreaking research in several areas, ultimately authoring more than 500 peer-reviewed and popular articles and more than 30 academic monographs and popular books.

He challenged the then-dominant view of schizophrenia as a psychological disorder caused by poor mothering, and contributed importantly to the formation of the field of neuropsychopharmacology. He co-authored research on the genetics of schizophrenia with the renowned geneticist, Ernst Mayer. He co-discovered the first effective lipid-lowering agent, the B vitamin niacin. He developed a controversial treatment for acute schizophrenia based on the principles of respect, shelter, sound nutrition, appropriate medication and the administration of large doses of certain water-soluble vitamins, in the process carrying out among the first controlled clinical trials in psychiatry.

He advanced a plausible biochemical hypothesis to explain the cause of schizophrenia and how niacin and vitamin C could eliminate its symptoms and prevent relapses. Intrigued by the concept of metabolic “models of madness,” he and his research colleagues, notably his close collaborator Humphry Osmond, studied the properties of the hallucinogens and pioneered the use of LSD, which in conjunction with skilled compassionate psychotherapy, was found to be an effective treatment for alcoholism. His work with alcoholism led to a close friendship with Bill W., the founder of Alcoholics Anonymous.

He organized a self-help organization for people with schizophrenia, Schizophrenics Anonymous. Participants at SA meetings occasionally exchanged the friendly greeting, “Salutations and hallucinations!” His colleague and friend, the American chemist Linus Pauling, championed the biochemical model for treating schizophrenia that was developed in Saskatchewan and provided a conceptual underpinning for the notion that large doses of certain naturally occurring substances can favorably alter disordered brain biochemistry, coining the term “orthomolecular psychiatry.”

Abram Hoffer moved to Victoria in 1976 where he practiced psychiatry for many years, becoming a founding member and president of the Senior Physicians Association of British Columbia. Sometimes criticized from afar for his controversial views, he was beloved by his many patients and close colleagues. He devoted his life to the goal of curing – not palliating – schizophrenia. His son Bill died in 1998 and his wife Rose died in 2001.

He is survived by his daughter, Miriam (and her husband Guy Ewing), by his son John (and his wife Yehudit Silverman), and by four grandchildren: Adam, Megan, Joshua and Rebecca. At his request, the funeral will be private. Donations can be sent to the International Schizophrenia Foundation, founded by Abram Hoffer.


Photo and story Credit: Darren Stone, The Victoria Times Colonist

FRIENDS AND VETERANS

TODAY IS MEMORIAL DAY IN AMERICA. Thousands of miles away in Belgium, however, young schoolchildren began their day at the Flanders Field cemetary, honoring the fallen American heroes from World War I who helped save their country at a desperate time in Belgian history. Under a clear blue sky, they sang the Star Spangled Banner and placed small American flags next to Belgian ones in memory of those who died to preserve the liberty of this great nation.

It gives me pause to consider that we're nearly 100 years removed from the first ‘Great War,’ yet small children in Belgium still take the time to learn our national anthem and pay homage to our nation’s sacrifice.

This Memorial Day evening, a family friend named Eric — an 18 year young man who just graduated from high school — ships off to boot camp as a Marine. With the world in turmoil, it pains me to think that his tour of duty will probably mean hazardous time in Iraq or Afghanistan. Nonetheless, I am proud of him — and honor his selflessness and courage.

On this Memorial Day, while we honor all of the brave men and women who fought and died in foreign wars, perhaps we should also ask, “what will we do to support Eric and others when they return home from war?”

And I wonder, will young Iraqi children pay homage to the American dead in the decades that follow?

. . .I wonder.

As a very young boy, I tried, unsuccessfully, to extract the meaning of war from my father, who served in the Army overseas during World War II. He resisted, time and again, looking rather distressed and puzzled by the notion that his youngest son — the second last of seven children — had this persistent curiosity about his time in Italy fighting Hitler and Mussolini’s troops. Being a Southerner by birth, Dad was always a private man, with little interest in divulging excessive emotion or grandiose stories. After years of pestering, he finally told me some painful stories about his fallen brethren in WWII. He had been sobered by war, to be sure — and he knew that we should never subject young men and women to its cruelty and death unless absolutely necessary.

I have a friend — a fine Hollywood actor and Vietnam veteran — who rails at many Veterans' organizations for demanding the kind of attention afforded to vets every Memorial and Veterans Day, because he thinks it glorifies war. As he ages, however, I suspect that even he must know that his sacrifice is worth such unconditional respect.

So today, I choose to give thanks to not only our veterans and those who died in faraway lands, but to the new recruits like Eric who are ready to fight with valor if asked to.

On this special day of memoriam, however, we should also thank our friends, the Belgian people.

For, thousands of miles away at Flanders Field cemetery — while most of us were sleeping — the next generation of Belgian leaders stood with their elderly citizens and paid homage to the memory of America's fallen warriors from nearly a century ago.

It’s the ultimate Memorial Day gift. And that's what friends do.

ENEMY OF THE STATE

WHILE EDITING MY FILM LET TRUTH BE THE BIAS in 1994, I was surrounded by people who tried desperately — and unsuccessfully —to exert their will over the contents of my first-ever film about health freedom. I was inundated by the musings of extremists on every side of the issue, and one of the quotes that people kept mailing me was supposedly written by Benjamin Rush, one of the signers of the U.S. Constitution.

The quote attributed to Rush was relatively unknown at the time, but has since become a rallying cry for those pursuing what I call “medical freedom of choice” in America. You can find it on hundreds of websites — but not in LET TRUTH BE THE BIAS.

"Unless we put Medical Freedom into the Constitution,” Rush is reported to have said, “the time will come when medicine will organize into an undercover dictatorship. . . restrict the art of healing to one class of men, and deny equal privilege to others. All such laws are un-American and despotic and have no place in a Republic.”

Rush was a Physician, writer, educator, and was also ‘the father of psychiatry’ in many ways. If it were true that he had spoken or written those words, it would have provided powerful fodder for my film. Imagine, one of the framers of the Constitution who had the foresight to include medical freedom alongside religious freedom!

So like any good journalist, I tried to verify the accuracy of the quote attributed to Rush. I looked in the National Archives, the Library of Congress, and finally, spoke with historian and author Alyn Brodsky, who had examined thousands of documents while researching his book "Benjamin Rush: Patriot and Physician." Brodsky assured me that he had seen nothing even remotely similar to the quote — and told me that it didn’t even sound like Rush, a man who was revered for using bloodletting, mercury and other elixirs as agents of “healing.” He researched it further, however, and months later concluded that the quote was not genuine.

Today, now more than ever, though, I wish Rush had spoken those words. And more importantly, I wish he had inserted those words into our Constitution or Bill of Rights.

For today, I'm commiserating the fact that a poor mother and her 13 year old son were forced to run away from home in Minnesota because the government was going to FORCE chemotherapy on the lad.

It's another sad day in the 'Home of the Free.'

We have allowed often corrupt and ill-educated people — from within corrupt and misguided entities like “Child Protection Services” to exert their will over free beings. . .over parents . . .and in truth, over us all. These are the same groups who decide to “protect” 50 percent of foster children by drugging them with mind-wasting anti-psychotic drugs, who often rip children from the arms of their loved ones, and who force their idealogy on millions of the nation’s most vulnerable citizens.

And now they’ve done so to Daniel Hauser.

Daniel, a 13-year old boy from Minnestota had the audacity to ‘say No to Chemo,’ for his Hodgkins. The “Child Protection” authorities forced his parents into court, where another clueless and spineless judge decided that Daniel must undergo chemotherapy to ‘save’ his life.

Today, now more than ever, I wish Rush had spoken those words.

His mother Colleen took off in the cool of a Minnesota night on Monday — and is now a fugitive from ‘justice.’ There is a nationwide manhunt for Daniel and his Mom, and the blogosphere is full of righteous people screaming “Child Abuse!” and “Throw the Parents in Jail!”

The Hauser's are now enemies of the state.

I love my country. But once more I am ashamed to live in a nation where we really believe that this is justice — that we have the RIGHT to make these decisions for others.

If Rush had written those words, this would not be relevant. Parents — and individuals — would be allowed to make their own personal health choices. Just as proponents of chemotherapy think alternative cures are quackery, I can guarantee you that proponents of alternative medicines — tens of millions of them — believe that chemo is quackery too.

But none of that matters now, evidently. A frightened 13 year old boy — and his equally frightened mother are on the lam, sent into hiding by the powerful forces of "child protection" services, big medicine — and their equally senseless judges. It is they who made the decision, not Colleen Hauser or Daniel. It is they who want to take a precious child away from his loving parents simply because he doesn’t want any more poison in his body.

You can disagree — or you can think the Hauser’s are crazy — but NO ONE should have the right to force medical treatment onto a 13-year-old boy — tied to a gurney like a criminal — against his will. THAT is a medical dictatorship.

Oh, how I wish Rush had spoken those words.

SCREENINGS OF GENERATION RX TAKING PLACE NATIONWIDE TONIGHT & OVER THE NEXT WEEK

Baily McLane Sikeston MO 573-471-2453 Tanner Street Church of God May 19th

Mark Meyers Glen Ellyn IL 630-868-8480 Glen Ellyn Theater May 18th 7pm

Paul Price Littleton CO 303-347-1112 Arapahoe Comm. College May 18th 7pm

Matt Milonas Naperville IL 630-428-0768 Classic Cinemas Ogden 6 May 18th 7pm

Abby Tebbe Dubuque IA 563-556-6252 MindFrame Theaters May 18th 7pm

Ashly Ochsner Orland Park IL 708-349-0040 Marcus Theater, Orland Park May 18th 7pm

Patrick and Jackie Newhouse Moline IL 309-764-3613 Putnam Museum IMAX May 18th 7pm

LaRelle Plubell Placerville CA 530-642-0224 Sequoia May 26th 6:30pm

Steve Nagel & Eric Dzwonkowski Longmont CO 303-776-6767

Fellowship Center LifeBridge Christan Church May 18th 7pm

Jeffery Harrison Sikerston MO 573-471-2453 Tanner Street Church of God May 19th

Randy Johns Texarkana TX 903-223-8776 Christ Nation Church May 18th 7pm

Anthony Ebel Crystal Lake IL 815-455-8213 McHenry Country College Auditorium May 19th 7pm

Michael Cody Crystal Lake IL 847.516.1688 McHenry Country College Auditorium May 19th 7pm

Joe Eunice Crystal Lake IL McHenry Country College Auditorium May 19th 7pm

Susan Mitchell Bloomington IL 309 828-6200 Naturally Yours Grocery May 18th 6:30pm

Ryan Cleland Edwardsville IL 618.655.0333 Meridian Ballroom, Morris University Center, SIU-E campus - May 26th 7:00pm

Jerod Posey Wildwood MO 636.273.4800 Chesterfield Galaxy 14 Cine May 19th 6:45pm

Nick Barnes Wildwood MO 636.273.4800 Chesterfield Galaxy 14 Cine May 19th 6:45pm

Nate Thompson Oswego IL 630-553-6149 Goodrich Kendall 10 Movie June 1st 7pm

Bill Koppari Rockford IL 815) 623-3379 Harlem Community Center May 26th 7pm

Bill Buchar Aurora IL 630-820-1330 Aurora/Eola Community Center May 28th 7:00 P.M.

Tiffany Brey Sikeston MO 573-264-1999 Tanner Street Church of God May 19th @ 7PM

Jeff Stickle Des Moines IA 515-255-3021 Plymouth Church May 18th 6pm

Wan-Qi Kim Talks About "Generation RX," Medications, and ADHD

Wan-Qi Kim is a Venture Capitalist, Founder of a Social Network for Gifted and Talented Students, and a popular blogger and teacher at his site, Journik.com. He is also Author of: "The Ancient Master of the Obvious," an Alchemist's book of secrets.

GOING HOME

PAMELA DICKENS GILCHRIST WAS AN ANGEL ON EARTH. From the first time we met in the early 1990s, we had an intimate connection. I honored her repeatedly when I was in her presence; it was quite easy to do with such a gentle soul.

I was the best man at her wedding, when she married my dear friend Charles Gilchrist. She had this silly giggle of a laugh that was so endearing. And so I tried — incessantly so — to make her laugh, just to unleash the glee.

It was glorious when I succeeded, which was often.

Though she would never concur, she was just a gorgeous gal — and one of the most gracious people to have ever crossed my path.

Pamela was blessed; she was a seer, and spectacularly gifted. She used the insights to help others — almost to the point of harming herself. That’s how big her heart was. As you can tell, I adored her. . .she was was the best friend a person could have.

She and Charles lived happily on a farm in Medina, OH., about 45 minutes outside Cleveland. It was her dream home, and it took all of the happy couple’s savings to buy this century-old farmhouse with six acres of land.

But it was worth it. They both beamed at the prospect of two creative souls owning a piece of the American Dream, far away from the bustle of the big city where they’d spent most of their lives. They had a barn full of cats, a dog and plenty of space — it was all they needed or wanted.

I often say that Pam was the kindest being I’d ever met — and that inludes the dozens of priests, ministers, and spriritual leaders I’d encountered over the decades.

We were so close that we spoke nearly every day. Yet, out of all of the conversations I had with her — over the many years I knew her, we only had one minor argument.

The discontent lasted all of an hour before it was resolved.

Five years after my divorce, when I was in serious conflict about living near New York City as a single father of two, it was Pam whom I phoned. There were, of course, more financial opportunities open to me in New York — and there was no lack of interest. But there were the kids, who lived primarily with me. At what price to them, I worried.

“Come home, Kevin,” Pam simply said. “You should come home. This is the right thing to do.” Less than a week later I rented a U-Haul truck and drove back to Cleveland with kids in tow.

That was how much I trusted my “Pammy,” as I called her. She was part Mom, part girlfriend, part healer, and part inspirational leader. Since her husband Charles and I were best friends, she adopted me, and nourished me like the single Dad I was, facing a world of challenges ahead.

Even though I had a special place in her heart, I knew I was not alone, for there were many whom she loved in such innocent and spectacular ways.

Not long after returning to Cleveland, we discovered that Pam had breast cancer. There had been months of bumbling by her doctors, as they missed huge tumors on her lower back repeatedly, even though she had undergone MRIs and x-rays monthly. But her doctors continued to misread her x-rays and misdiagnose her, so within months, the disease had advanced enough to be serious and life threatening. Forced with what she literally considered to be no choice, she chose the chemo.

For months, she struggled so, torn by the fact that she knew the chemo was killing her, but unable to afford anything else. This tore at Charles also, because as any man will attest, there is nothing more emasculating than being unable to create a financial miracle to save the day; to whisk her off to Mexico or Europe or wherever was necessary; to utilize any extravagant alternative treatments available to save the life of a loved one.

It was ten years ago this month, in April of 1999, when Pammy finally gave in — gave up, and checked out. I can honestly say that not a week goes by without me thinking of her. I see her in my dreams — and my daydreams. She speaks to me, I think, just to let me know that I still have responsibilities to carry forth.

When Pam died, I was seriously concerned about Charles. He’d finally found the love of his life only to lose her — and ultimately, the farm. Because even though Pamela had health insurance, her final bill was over $200,000 more than the insurance would cover. The bank seized the farm, which was to be Pam’s last vestige, after the flood of medical bills completely swallowed my dear friend, leaving him broken and sad.

For Pam’s two sons it was a wake up call about death, dying, and the reality of healthcare in America. What neither of them understood at the time was that there would be more painful lessons to come later in life.

PAMELA ADORED HER SONS, Jim and Mark Dickens — and her giggle laugh was out in full force whenever they were around, which was often. We were all kind of a big happy family for a while, and
Mark and his brother Jimmy would even babysit my two boys when they were very young so I could go to business meetings.

When I’d return, I usually found them wrestling and laughing and generally being little boys again themselves. I’ll never forget those scenes of hilarity and the pure, joyful havoc they wrought.

When their Mom died, there was such a void — for so long. We kept in touch, though not enough, I’m afraid.

THE LAST TIME I SAW MARK was around Christmastime 2007. There were hundreds who came together for a ‘silent auction” benefitting Mark, who as a 20-something had contracted cancer. There he was, with no health insurance — barely able to keep his head above water in the economic and ethical abortion we call healthcare in America.

He was gaunt after months of chemo and radiation. He was deeply in debt and conflicted. He was trying to survive cancer, the disease that had claimed his mom, but the medical bills were further stressing him out.

As I privately pressed a wad of money into his hands I whispered, “Mark, not one dime goes to those medical bills. NOT ONE DIME. Use this for food or heat or whatever you need most, but not one dime to those people.”

Mark looked at me and smiled. He knew it was a conversation I had had with his Mother many times when she became ill. It reminded him of her, and he got a very faraway look in his eyes.

Today, we buried Mark, who died a few days ago. I was regaled with stories of his kindness, his magnetism, his selflessness — and it reminded me of Pam.

It made me smile to know that mother and child are reuniting, somewhere in the ether. And to know that somewhere, there is joy and laughter.

So today, Breathe. Take in every minute. Take not for granted even a moment of Life. Honor your time here. Express your love. Now.

Don’t wait.



###

Photo of Mark Dickens and Pamela Dickens Gilchrist courtesy of Charles L. Gilchrist

THE PROMISED LAND

THEY FOUGHT THE ENEMY through the jungles of Vietnam, ducking gunfire, spending sleepless nights and avoiding death, only to be caught in the tripwires and booby traps set by society here at home. I see the faces of America’s war heroes living on the streets of every major city I travel to. They were soldiers who were proud to serve...proud to fight for a way of life here in the Promised Land.

And now they sleep on the streets for all to see, from Los Angeles to our nation’s capitol.

That this fate has been dealt to them is ironic — because these men and women — like so many before them who served in a foreign land — dreamed of the day they would come home to America. Home — home of the plenty, home of the brave — and now, home of the homeless.

“The way I live now is like I lived back in the jungle,” one vet told me. “Thirty years later look at me. . .this is where I live at,” he said while motioning to his plastic-encased barracks. I sat with James for nearly an hour as the wind ripped through his 6X10 shack. He was an articulate man, but clearly troubled. I saw a few books stacked neatly in the corner; one by Albert Camus, the French author and playwright, and another by James Baldwin.

Can you imagine that, if but for a moment? A homeless man, a soldier who’d dug a new foxhole, reading books by a Nobel prizewinner — and another by a man who was a powerful voice in literary circles for decades?

How could it be, I asked James, that patriots have been relegated to this subterranean existence — especially in a nation which claims to revere its’ warriors?

He looked at me and smiled. “Son,” he said with sad eyes and a half-smile, “have you ever killed a man? Do you know what that can do to you in your darkest hours?”

When I produced THE PROMISED LAND in 1991, America had just won the first Gulf War a year earlier. There was talk from President George H.W. Bush that we had finally “kicked the Vietnam syndrome, once and for all.”

Back then, I thought it apropos to raise the question of what it meant to be a soldier in war, and whether these men and women on the streets — drunk with dark images and in need of help — were casualties of a society disconnected from the realities of the horror they encountered in war.

It is a question I have never been able to escape. . .and it is a question we should be asking ourselves today as the killing and dying continues in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Cleveland State professor John P. Wilson was the first to call Vietnam vets “Forgotten Warriors,” and to bring attention to the deeply held trauma they felt upon returning from that war. Wilson and his own “band of brothers,’ including former Army Captain Shad Meshad and others, helped define what we now know as PTSD, or Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. It was the modern version of “shellshock,” a term known to just about any WWII veteran.

The question is, will we really “support our troops” when they come home? The answer is anything but certain, considering our recent history.

I remember thinking how nearly every car in America sported those silly magnetic yellow ribbons proclaiming “We Support Our Troops,” but when push-comes-to-shove, chances are that we will abandon our soldiers again — even if they are not homeless.

TODAY, with about 130,000 Americans serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, the soldiers we claim to support are living a hellish existence: again, they are ducking gunfire, spending sleepless nights and doing their best to avoid death in faraway lands.

They are fighting in divided nations, and their world is a tempest-in-a-teapot.

Will we remember that we owe them a far greater debt than to merely pat them on the back? Will we repay their service —as the Pentagon budget becomes more bloated with weaponry and big corporate payoffs — with counseling and healthcare services and job support? Or will we fail them again — as we have done so many times in the past?

Will we drug them with anti-psychotics and consider it “Mission Accomplished,” or will we really embrace them, show patience and compassion and loyalty after their selflessness?

These men and women have sacrificed the best years of their lives in service to our nation. They will be stained by the sights, sounds and smell of war — and trapped by the hyper aberrations of combat.

It is up to us — to our leaders — to choose whether they return with the full support of our people, or whether they become — like so many before them — unknown soldiers left to die without dignity — in the Promised Land.

OVER 271 MILLION POUNDS OF DRUGS CONTAMINATE PUBLIC WATERWAYS

When I was filming GENERATION RX, I met a British psychiatrist and we talked about the revelation that Prozac had been discovered in the River Thames . . .and had entered the water supply consumed by millions of Brits.

"Are people in London really THAT depressed?" I asked him, somewhat sheepishly.

"No, no. . .no," was his response while laughing.

As it turns out, however, our conversation was no laughing matter.

Over the past few years, events have proven that concern over drugs in public rivers and streams are not limited to the UK. In America, the AP has uncovered that at least 271 millions of pounds of unused pharmaceuticals are being released by the drug companies in our public waterways. This is frightening, to say the least. Millions more are flushed down the toilet and down the drain, and make no mistake: we are pumping powerful contaminants and intoxicants like lithium into America's drinking water every single day. It's not only bad news for the fish, but for tens of millions of us.

If one refuses to take this threat seriously, they need only look to India, where a growing environmental and public health disaster is looming. When researchers analyzed vials of treated wastewater from a plant where about 90 Indian drug factories dump their residues, they were stunned to discover that a powerful antibiotic was "being spewed into one stream each day." Enough antibiotics were being released "to treat every person in a city of 90,000."

And it’s not just ciprofloxacin. The water — supposedly cleaned by a wastewater filtration plant — was "a floating soup of 21 different active pharmaceutical ingredients, used in generics for treatment of hypertension, heart disease, chronic liver ailments, depression, gonorrhea, ulcers and other ailments."

Researchers in India said, "It is the highest levels of pharmaceuticals ever detected in the environment," but then again, they haven't yet come to America, where the AP has confirmed that this nightmare is coming to a stream, lake, and landfill near you.

From the AP Investigation: "One thing is clear: The massive amount of pharmaceuticals being flushed by the health services industry is aggravating an emerging problem documented by a series of AP investigative stories - the commonplace presence of minute concentrations of pharmaceuticals in the nation's drinking water supplies, affecting at least 46 million Americans."

The AP series follows one by the New York Times last Spring, the BBC last year, the UK's Guardian newspaper and probably countless others. Millions of tons of narcotics, antipsychotics, antidepressants, stimulant drugs and more are being ingested by children, the elderly, and well, ALL of us who do not use some kind of sophisticated water purification system.

Now, that the AP has confirmed that codeine, lithium (used in bipolar drugs), blood thinners, chemotherapy agents like fluorouracil, epilepsy drugs and sedatives are being released into the environment by the ton, Americans had better take notice — and take action to protect themselves. Anyone who does not have a powerful water filtration system is playing Russian roulette every time they drink water from the tap.

IT'S WORTH REPEATING: the ongoing investigation by the Associated Press proves what a nightmare we have wrought by our obsession with pharmaceuticals.

####

Tons of released drugs taint US water

By JEFF DONN, MARTHA MENDOZA and JUSTIN PRITCHARD, Associated Press Writers
Mon Apr 20, 2009

U.S. manufacturers, including major drugmakers, have legally released at least 271 million pounds of pharmaceuticals into waterways that often provide drinking water — contamination the federal government has consistently overlooked, according to an Associated Press investigation.

Hundreds of active pharmaceutical ingredients are used in a variety of manufacturing, including drugmaking: For example, lithium is used to make ceramics and treat bipolar disorder; nitroglycerin is a heart drug and also used in explosives; copper shows up in everything from pipes to contraceptives.

Federal and industry officials say they don't know the extent to which pharmaceuticals are released by U.S. manufacturers because no one tracks them — as drugs. But a close analysis of 20 years of federal records found that, in fact, the government unintentionally keeps data on a few, allowing a glimpse of the pharmaceuticals coming from factories.

As part of its ongoing PharmaWater investigation about trace concentrations of pharmaceuticals in drinking water, AP identified 22 compounds that show up on two lists: the EPA monitors them as industrial chemicals that are released into rivers, lakes and other bodies of water under federal pollution laws, while the Food and Drug Administration classifies them as active pharmaceutical ingredients.

The data don't show precisely how much of the 271 million pounds comes from drugmakers versus other manufacturers; also, the figure is a massive undercount because of the limited federal government tracking.

To date, drugmakers have dismissed the suggestion that their manufacturing contributes significantly to what's being found in water. Federal drug and water regulators agree.

But some researchers say the lack of required testing amounts to a 'don't ask, don't tell' policy about whether drugmakers are contributing to water pollution.

"It doesn't pass the straight-face test to say pharmaceutical manufacturers are not emitting any of the compounds they're creating," said Kyla Bennett, who spent 10 years as an EPA enforcement officer before becoming an ecologist and environmental attorney.

Pilot studies in the U.S. and abroad are now confirming those doubts.

Last year, the AP reported that trace amounts of a wide range of pharmaceuticals — including antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones — have been found in American drinking water supplies. Including recent findings in Dallas, Cleveland and Maryland's Prince George's and Montgomery counties, pharmaceuticals have been detected in the drinking water of at least 51 million Americans.

Most cities and water providers still do not test. Some scientists say that wherever researchers look, they will find pharma-tainted water.

Consumers are considered the biggest contributors to the contamination. We consume drugs, then excrete what our bodies don't absorb. Other times, we flush unused drugs down toilets. The AP also found that an estimated 250 million pounds of pharmaceuticals and contaminated packaging are thrown away each year by hospitals and long-term care facilities.
Researchers have found that even extremely diluted concentrations of drugs harm fish, frogs and other aquatic species. Also, researchers report that human cells fail to grow normally in the laboratory when exposed to trace concentrations of certain drugs. Some scientists say they are increasingly concerned that the consumption of combinations of many drugs, even in small amounts, could harm humans over decades.

Utilities say the water is safe. Scientists, doctors and the EPA say there are no confirmed human risks associated with consuming minute concentrations of drugs. But those experts also agree that dangers cannot be ruled out, especially given the emerging research.
___
Two common industrial chemicals that are also pharmaceuticals — the antiseptics phenol and hydrogen peroxide — account for 92 percent of the 271 million pounds identified as coming from drugmakers and other manufacturers. Both can be toxic and both are considered to be ubiquitous in the environment.

However, the list of 22 includes other troubling releases of chemicals that can be used to make drugs and other products: 8 million pounds of the skin bleaching cream hydroquinone, 3 million pounds of nicotine compounds that can be used in quit-smoking patches, 10,000 pounds of the antibiotic tetracycline hydrochloride. Others include treatments for head lice and worms.

Residues are often released into the environment when manufacturing equipment is cleaned.

A small fraction of pharmaceuticals also leach out of landfills where they are dumped. Pharmaceuticals released onto land include the chemo agent fluorouracil, the epilepsy medicine phenytoin and the sedative pentobarbital sodium. The overall amount may be considerable, given the volume of what has been buried — 572 million pounds of the 22 monitored drugs since 1988.

In one case, government data shows that in Columbus, Ohio, pharmaceutical maker Boehringer Ingelheim Roxane Inc. discharged an estimated 2,285 pounds of lithium carbonate — which is considered slightly toxic to aquatic invertebrates and freshwater fish — to a local wastewater treatment plant between 1995 and 2006. Company spokeswoman Marybeth C. McGuire said the pharmaceutical plant, which uses lithium to make drugs for bipolar disorder, has violated no laws or regulations. McGuire said all the lithium discharged, an annual average of 190 pounds, was lost when residues stuck to mixing equipment were washed down the drain.
___
Pharmaceutical company officials point out that active ingredients represent profits, so there's a huge incentive not to let any escape. They also say extremely strict manufacturing regulations — albeit aimed at other chemicals — help prevent leakage, and that whatever traces may get away are handled by onsite wastewater treatment.

"Manufacturers have to be in compliance with all relevant environmental laws," said Alan Goldhammer, a scientist and vice president at the industry trade group Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.

Goldhammer conceded some drug residues could be released in wastewater, but stressed "it would not cause any environmental issues because it was not a toxic substance at the level that it was being released at."

Several big drugmakers were asked this simple question: Have you tested wastewater from your plants to find out whether any active pharmaceuticals are escaping, and if so what have you found?
No drugmaker answered directly.

"Based on research that we have reviewed from the past 20 years, pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities are not a significant source of pharmaceuticals that contribute to environmental risk," GlaxoSmithKline said in a statement.

AstraZeneca spokeswoman Kate Klemas said the company's manufacturing processes "are designed to avoid, or otherwise minimize the loss of product to the environment" and thus "ensure that any residual losses of pharmaceuticals to the environment that do occur are at levels that would be unlikely to pose a threat to human health or the environment."
One major manufacturer, Pfizer Inc., acknowledged that it tested some of its wastewater — but outside the United States.
The company's director of hazard communication and environmental toxicology, Frank Mastrocco, said Pfizer has sampled effluent from some of its foreign drug factories. Without disclosing details, he said the results left Pfizer "confident that the current controls and processes in place at these facilities are adequately protective of human health and the environment."
It's not just the industry that isn't testing.

FDA spokesman Christopher Kelly noted that his agency is not responsible for what comes out on the waste end of drug factories. At the EPA, acting assistant administrator for water Mike Shapiro — whose agency's Web site says pharmaceutical releases from manufacturing are "well defined and controlled" — did not mention factories as a source of pharmaceutical pollution when asked by the AP how drugs get into drinking water.

"Pharmaceuticals get into water in many ways," he said in a written statement. "It's commonly believed the majority come from human and animal excretion. A portion also comes from flushing unused drugs down the toilet or drain; a practice EPA generally discourages."

His position echoes that of a line of federal drug and water regulators as well as drugmakers, who concluded in the 1990s — before highly sensitive tests now used had been developed — that manufacturing is not a meaningful source of pharmaceuticals in the environment.

Pharmaceutical makers typically are excused from having to submit an environmental review for new products, and the FDA has never rejected a drug application based on potential environmental impact. Also at play are pressures not to delay potentially lifesaving drugs. What's more, because the EPA hasn't concluded at what level, if any, pharmaceuticals are bad for the environment or harmful to people, drugmakers almost never have to report the release of pharmaceuticals they produce.
"The government could get a national snapshot of the water if they chose to," said Jennifer Sass, a senior scientist for the Natural Resources Defense Council, "and it seems logical that we would want to find out what's coming out of these plants."
Ajit Ghorpade, an environmental engineer who worked for several major pharmaceutical companies before his current job helping run a wastewater treatment plant, said drugmakers have no impetus to take measurements that the government doesn't require.

"Obviously nobody wants to spend the time or their dime to prove this," he said. "It's like asking me why I don't drive a hybrid car? Why should I? It's not required."
___
After contacting the nation's leading drugmakers and filing public records requests, the AP found two federal agencies that have tested.

Both the EPA and the U.S. Geological Survey have studies under way comparing sewage at treatment plants that receive wastewater from drugmaking factories against sewage at treatment plants that do not.

Preliminary USGS results, slated for publication later this year, show that treated wastewater from sewage plants serving drug factories had significantly more medicine residues. Data from the EPA study show a disproportionate concentration in wastewater of an antibiotic that a major Michigan factory was producing at the time the samples were taken.

Meanwhile, other researchers recorded concentrations of codeine in the southern reaches of the Delaware River that were at least 10 times higher than the rest of the river.

The scientists from the Delaware River Basin Commission won't have to look far when they try to track down potential sources later this year. One mile from the sampling site, just off shore of Pennsville, N.J., there's a pipe that spits out treated wastewater from a municipal plant. The plant accepts sewage from a pharmaceutical factory owned by Siegfried Ltd. The factory makes codeine.

"We have implemented programs to not only reduce the volume of waste materials generated but to minimize the amount of pharmaceutical ingredients in the water," said Siegfried spokeswoman Rita van Eck.

Another codeine plant, run by Johnson & Johnson subsidiary Noramco Inc., is about seven miles away. A Noramco spokesman acknowledged that the Wilmington, Del., factory had voluntarily tested its wastewater and found codeine in trace concentrations thousands of times greater than what was found in the Delaware River. "The amounts of codeine we measured in the wastewater, prior to releasing it to the City of Wilmington, are not considered to be hazardous to the environment," said a company spokesman.

In another instance, equipment-cleaning water sent down the drain of an Upsher-Smith Laboratories, Inc. factory in Denver consistently contains traces of warfarin, a blood thinner, according to results obtained under a public records act request. Officials at the company and the Denver Metro Wastewater Reclamation District said they believe the concentrations are safe.
Warfarin, which also is a common rat poison and pesticide, is so effective at inhibiting growth of aquatic plants and animals it's actually deliberately introduced to clean plants and tiny aquatic animals from ballast water of ships.

"With regard to wastewater management we are subject to a variety of federal, state and local regulation and oversight," said Joel Green, Upsher-Smith's vice president and general counsel. "And we work hard to maintain systems to promote compliance."

Baylor University professor Bryan Brooks, who has published more than a dozen studies related to pharmaceuticals in the environment, said assurances that drugmakers run clean shops are not enough.

"I have no reason to believe them or not believe them," he said. "We don't have peer-reviewed studies to support or not support their claims."
___
Associated Press Writer Don Mitchell in Denver contributed to this report.

MAN WHO KILLED HIS FAMILY IN MARYLAND MENTIONED MEDICATION IN SUICIDE NOTES

(CNN) -- A Maryland man believed to have shot and stabbed his wife and three young children to death before killing himself with a shotgun was having money problems and left a note saying he suffered from "psychological issues," authorities said.

Christopher Wood, 34, may have slashed at least some of his family members in the killings and used a small-caliber handgun on others, Frederick County Sheriff Charles Jenkins said.

He was found dead of an apparently self-inflicted shotgun wound at the foot of the bed where the bodies of his wife and 2-year-old daughter lay, the sheriff said.

Wood's sons were 5 and 4 years old, authorities said. His wife, Francie Billotti Wood, was 33.

The boys were found in their beds in a single bedroom, the sheriff said. Authorities did not release the names of the children.

"These are horrific incidents," said Jenkins, who said he couldn't remember another homicide in the past 20 years in Middletown, a one-stoplight town northwest of Baltimore. "No one should ever have to be exposed to this."

Jenkins told CNN that at least five notes apparently handwritten by Wood were found inside the home. While the notes didn't immediately tell investigators what prompted the killings, they did provide some insight into possible problems.

"There is some indication in at least one of the notes that there might have been some psychological issues with Mr. Wood," Jenkins said.

There was "a mention of some medication" in that note, according to the sheriff.

Jenkins said the sheriff's office had no record of domestic violence or other family disputes at the Wood's home.

He said investigators also have learned of money problems for Wood, a salesman for CSX Railroad.

"We are aware there were some, maybe, debt problems -- some financial problems," Jenkins said.

Cpl. Jennifer Bailey said deputies went to the home shortly after 9 a.m. after Mrs. Wood's father called. Her family had not seen the Woods for about a day and her father forced his way into the locked home, finding the bodies, according to Jenkins.

Authorities said a shotgun was found next to Christopher Wood's body and a .25-caliber handgun was found in a "container" in the kitchen. The sheriff said other weapons that could have been used to stab and cut the victims were found, but he did not say what those weapons were. Watch sheriff's department's statement »

Francie Wood's family were longtime residents of the Middletown area. Her brother had recently retired from a career as a sheriff's deputy, Jenkins said.

The family had moved to town from Florida about four months ago.

"We're all in shock," said the Rev. Kevin Farmer, the family's minister at Holy Family Catholic Church. "This was a family, though they hadn't been with us very long, they are an integral part of our community."Watch views from the crime scene »

He said the road the Woods lived on is a shortcut to the church and he would often see the children while riding a scooter he uses when the weather is good.

"They would always stop and wave and get big eyes as the scooter came by," he said. "They were very happy kids."

Jenkins said autopsies will be performed on the bodies over the next few days and that it could be weeks before the results are ready to be released.

Jenkins told CNN that at least five notes apparently handwritten by Wood were found inside the home. While the notes didn't immediately tell investigators what prompted the killings, they did provide some insight into possible problems, the sheriff said.

"There is some indication in at least one of the notes that there might have been some psychological issues with Mr. Wood," Jenkins said.

Cpl. Jennifer Bailey said deputies went to the home shortly after 9 a.m. after Mrs. Wood's father called. The family had not been seen for several days, Bailey said.

Authorities said several weapons, including a shotgun, were found inside the home.

Christopher Wood had been an employee of CSX Railroad, Jenkins said. He said the sheriff's office had no record of domestic violence or other family disputes at the Woods' home.

"In my entire career, just about 20 years, this is probably the worst tragedy I've ever been a part of or ever seen in Frederick County," Jenkins said.

Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/04/18/maryland.family.shot

JOURNALISTS POSTURE AS AWFUL ANNIVERSARIES APPROACH

The following article by ABC News offers forth 1500 words about the the Virginia Tech and Columbine killings on the anniversaries of those awful events. Fifteen hundred words of conjecture, pseudoscience, and nonsense comprise this “retrospective,” but very little in the way of journalism.

Unfortunately, the article does not mention the words “drugs” or “medication,” or anything similar even once.

As a student of journalism — as someone who was taught the responsibilities inherent with the job, it is another sad day.

It is time to face the fact that our media — and the “country club journalists” who comprise it, are not interested in tough investigations any longer, especially if it runs against their big business interests. They are not interested in truth, although they all posture as if truth is the engine for what they do on a daily basis.

When it comes to confronting the most powerful multinational corporations in the world, the important task is left to a band of independent thinkers who cannot be bought: people like journalist Robert Whitaker, for example.

We have forever retreated into “corporate journalism,” and evidently there is no shame in ignoring the tenets of the greats who came before us. As newspapers fail, and as TV fills the void, shoddy, air-filled journalism takes its place.

Have we learned nothing from Woodward, Bernstein, Cronkite and Murrow?

Yes, we have.

We have learned how to mute real journalism — and render it useless. As a society, we had better learn to support those who are the truth-tellers — before it's too late.

____

Psychology of Va. Tech, Columbine Killers Still Baffles Experts
Not All Psychotics, Psychopaths Will Become School Shooters; Mental Health Education Needed
By SUSAN DONALDSON JAMES
April 16, 2009—

This is the second in a series on Columbine, 10 Years Later

Two years ago today, Seung-Hui Cho slaughtered 32 students at Virginia Tech, claiming to have been inspired by the two teenagers who carried out the Columbine shootings, calling them "martyrs" in delusional diatribe he videotaped for the world.
"You had a hundred billion ways to have avoided today," he said on video aired on national television. "But you decided to spill my blood. You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option. Now you have blood on your hands that will never wash off."

In 1999, when Eric Harris seduced his friend Dylan Klebold to open fire at Colorado's Columbine High School, killing 13 and injuring 24, no one had a definitive profile of the school shooter.

Today -- as the 10th anniversary of the Columbine tragedy on April 20 approaches-- experts say they can't predict which teens will go on a suicide-driven rampage. "Not all psychotics or psychopaths are going to kill and most are not dangerous," said veteran FBI behavioral scientist Kenneth V. Lanning. In 2000, The National Institute of Justice joined forces with the Secret Service and the Department of Education to assess ways to prevent school shootings.

Looking at 37 school shootings to find patterns in school-aged assassins, the study concluded that all are male and most are loners, with some kind of grievance. More than half had revenge as a motive.
"But that's typical of almost every adolescent," Lanning told ABCNews.com.

Problem With False Positives and Negatives

"The biggest problem with school shooters is the false positives and false negatives," he said. "How many people in any school have all these characteristics and will never shoot anybody." Reports from the Department of Education show schools to be largely safe. But high-profile shootings have caused anxiety among parents, students and their teachers.

Contrary to public perception, school shootings declined after 1993, although there were copycat incidents from 1997 to 1999 "stimulated" by unprecedented media coverage, according to the National School Safety Center.

Still, they continue to capture the nation's imagination with images of vengeful outcasts, trench coats and bullied loners.
Some of the conclusions of the federal report were borne out in the Virginia Tech tragedy: shooters tend not to snap, but usually plan months or years in advance and often tell a friend or classmate.

Cho reportedly began planning his attack more than a month before the 2007 massacre, when he purchased his first gun. His video, made in combat gear, appears to have been made at least six days before the attack.

School Killers: Cho, Harris, Klebold

Harris and Klebold also planned in advance, with journals and "basement tapes" chronicling their plan to blow up Columbine High School. But the comparisons end there. And when the public throws around words interchangeably -- like psychotic and psychopath -- they underscore the need for better mental health education.

"When we see a person go off the deep end in a shooting, we look in hindsight and piece it together," Lanning said. "Frequently all the warning signs were there and we should have known. But you get warning signs one and two from the mother, three and four from the teacher, five and six from the counselor and probation officer."

Schools need to find better ways to accumulate information and share, within the boundaries of privacy.

"I can't just pick up any Tom, Dick or Harry under the sun," Lanning said. "I'd get sued. The bottom line is this is what American society struggles with all the time, balancing public safety with freedom and rights." The most iconic of all school shooters -- Harris and Klebold at Columbine and Cho at Virginia Tech -- could not have been more different, according to most experts.

Seung-Hui Cho Was Psychotic, Experts Say

Cho, 23, was mentally ill and delusional -- a psychotic, mental health experts have said. As early as 2005, two female students at Virginia Tech complained about the anxious son of Korean immigrants, and a state court declared him to be at risk for suicide, referring him for psychiatric treatment.

Like the Columbine killers, Cho took his own life in the rampage, but mental health experts have said he may have suffered from bipolar depression or schizophrenia. Unlike Cho, Harris was a psychopath -- controlling, manipulative and sadistic, according to journalists, psychologists and law enforcement experts who studied the case. Psychopaths are in touch with reality and rational, and nearly always well-liked and charming, according to experts.

Klebold was a lonely depressive, full of mood swings and suppressed emotional rage, according to psychiatrists involved in the case. But together, the Columbine pair was a "deadly dyad," according to Dave Cullen, a journalist who has covered the tragedy a decade and published a book, "Columbine," this month to coincide with the 10th anniversary.

Parents Say Bullying to Blame

Neither the Chos, nor the Columbine families ever talked freely with the press about their sons' actions. But in 2004, on the fifth anniversary of the tragedy, Tom and Sue Klebold, who still live in Littleton, Colo., responded to an article in the New York Times.

The Klebolds told reporter David Brooks that they objected to the way their son had been described as "depressive" and blamed the toxic atmosphere of teasing at the high school.

But Cullen said that unlike Cho, who was not well-liked and kept to himself, Harris and Klebold had an active social life and were bullies, rather than bullied.

"We always get the wrong answer because we phrase the question wrong," Cullen said.

"Everyone says, 'Why did they do it?' That gets you in trouble. There isn't one thing to explain Columbine," he said. "Why Eric did it and why Dylan did it -- they are polar opposites. You can't fuse it into one.

"It's the same thing with school shooters," he said. "We still go the same route and look for a profile and think we've got one -- outcast, loners and bullies. In two-thirds of cases, they don't apply. There are three or four or five profiles."

According to former FBI psychiatrist Frank Ochberg, who worked in hostage negotiations in the 1970s, Cullen's book "hit the nail on the head."

"The general public has its own idea about evil and how it gets created, distilled and powered," Ochberg told ABCNews.com. "We have so many archtypes."

Harris was a "budding psychopath, a person without a conscience," he said. "He got his satisfaction by dominating."
"Psychopaths don't feel guilty because they are blind to guilt," Ochberg said. Harris also had sadistic tendencies, which propelled him to "seek vengeance."

Klebold, on the other hand, was depressed, with pent up anger and "mood regulation problems," but together, they had "violent creativity," Ochberg said.

"Eric needed Dylan's emotionality and impulsiveness, and Dylan needed Eric's cold psychopathy," according to Ochberg.
While Klebold longed to end his life, as seen in his journals, for Harris, suicide was not a concern, according to Ochberg.
"His life wasn't as important as his appetite," he said. "He turned a comic book fantasy into reality. The purpose was not to kill himself, but it was an option, He needed power."

Psychotics: Mentally Ill, Delusional

According to FBI trainer Lanning, psychopathy and psychosis can overlap, but the public wrongly uses the terms interchangeably.

Psychotics are mentally ill, delusional and out of touch with reality; psychopaths can be "wheeler-dealers and manipulators," he said.

Most psychotics are not violent, but their nature is unpredictable, he said.

"Neither is necessarily a killer," said Lanning. "But society tends to focus on those common violent crimes."

Whether psychopaths -- sometimes called sociopaths -- lack a moral compass is up for debate, according to Lanning.
"They have a conscience," he said. "It's just that it's their own, not society's.

"A sex offender may kidnap and rape and mutilate women, but if you put him in prison next to the guy who fondles children, he thinks he's a sick pervert," he said.

Psychopaths: Con Artists and Race Drivers

Some sub-cultures admire the character of psychopaths.

"If you're a con artist and cheating people out of their savings, the best character to be is a psychopath," Lanning said.
When raised in a nurturing family, they tend to be thrill-seekers -- race car drivers and mountain climbers, "which is more acceptable," he said.

In fiction, they are self-focused characters like J.R. Ewing from television's "Dallas" and Scarlett O'Hara from "Gone With the Wind."

Still, one of the lessons of Columbine and Virginia Tech is understanding the complexity of the human psyche and the difficulty of identifying which teens will cross the line and become a killers.

"Remember Charles Atlas?" asked Lanning, who cites the comic book character who is a 90-pound weekly, gets sand kicked in his face and builds his body up and seeks revenge.

"The idea of avenging through physical force for slights against is the age-old dream of adolescent boys," he said. "You are an outcast, you get picked on and you want to get even."


Copyright © 2009 ABC News Internet Ventures

Film Review of Generation RX: "An Important Message to Society"

The above is an insightful film review by Ronen Levi Yitzchak Segal of New York City. I think the words speak volumes, and represent the views of millions of others.

Shalom, brother. Thank you for caring!

A NOTE ABOUT RECIPROCITY

WHENEVER I WRITE ABOUT THE POOR, the responses always come in abundance. ONE PAYCHECK AWAY FROM HUMANITY was another example of this and my email was jammed with dozens of letters. A number of you have been kind enough to broadcast your feelings here. More than one of you were offended, as if I were issuing a personal and direct challenge; some were inspired to act; some heaped praise, and so on.

It is a sign that I should continue to write about the poor and homeless, especially as our nation struggles. That I shall do.

Below is a post from Gemma Benton, whose blog I began following at the beginning of 2009. She is committed to "Setting a thought in motion that will sustain seven generations, and prompting an indigenous conversation." I hope to pursue these issues with her over the coming weeks and months, but in the meantime, I don't think she'll mind if I share the entirety of what she wrote here.

You can find her wonderful blog, "Way Beyond Green: going beyond the conventional into deep sustainability" at http://waybeyondgreen.org/


ANOTHER NOTE ABOUT RECIPROCITY

If you read this blog through Google reader, you’ll want to “refresh” my post about reciprocity. I changed a bit. Soon after I changing it, I came across Kevin Miller’s post about his interaction with some ‘down on their luck’ folks in Cleveland.

You’ll enjoy his story. Here’s my take.. Kevin’s generosity was true in deed and heart and is a great example we can all learn from. Thank you Kevin!

Yet standing away from the forefront, in a single gesture I was struck by the black man who had nothing..homeless and freezing… yet found a generous moment in his soul as well. He could have done the ’street rap’, ranting about how “Its about time someone helped..I’m entitled to…a warm bed, a roof over my head…”

Yet that’s not what happened, he turned his attention to express his appreciation and return a kindness. Wow! Now that’s worth talking about. I wish I could buy this guy dinner and a cool hat to go with his new jacket and thank him for giving us the gift of meaningful conversation.

There has been a lot of talk going around about what folks think they have a “right to” or are entitled to. Some times we get so sideways with our “right to” that we lose our way and become ‘besides our selves‘.

True generosity and kindness is about giving with humility. This way of getting ‘besides our selves’ and getting humble again, it’s what the old people used to call “becoming a human being”.

If out of the crisis, we emerge true human beings… well that would be the healing miracle that the Elders have been calling for and it could be the sign for great healing of the planet; better said, the healing of our selves.




The above photo is 57-year-old Robert Slaughter, a homeless man who lives in a wooded area in Rockville. It was taken by Michael Williamson/The Washington Post

ONE PAYCHECK AWAY FROM HUMANITY

THE STREETS OF CLEVELAND were filled with people last week, due mainly to the record-setting attendance levels at the 33rd Annual Cleveland International Film Festival (CIFF). If anyone doubts the power of the arts to engage citizens and revitalize communities, they would be wise to note how many suburbanites have flocked to downtown for CIFF during March.

AS I WANDERED through the streets of Cleveland and hosted out-of-town visitors, a few other thoughts bubbled to the surface as well. The numbers of homeless on the streets was staggering and seemed to be higher than the dreadful period in the late 80s and early 90s when beggars seemed to outnumber businessmen.

So it was sobering, to say the least — and upon request, I handed out $1 bills to dozens of men and women. I implored them all to avoid using the money for alcohol or drugs. Most were clear-eyed and appeared alcohol free, so perhaps my human investment did indeed go for food rather than ‘the devil’s tonic’ or some other destructive device.

Nevertheless, one of my guests gently criticized me for handing out dollar bills, saying, “don’t you realize you’re being scammed?”

I nodded his way and smiled, and recalled a similar event from New York City a decade prior. I was in New York frequently as a literary agent in 1997, and a nearly identical scenario existed. On every block there was a new person begging for money. Nearly every time I would give them a dollar until my dollar bills ran dry. A friend of mine, a hardened New Yorker who had lived in the Concrete Jungle for over twenty years, flipped out. “What the *%#@ are you doing, man?” he blurted out. “These people are here every day. This is what they DO. Why are you giving them money?”

I turned and smiled, calmly. I’d heard this reasoning many times before, especially during the production of my film, THE PROMISED LAND. “My friend,” I began, “if these people have fallen so far that they feel the need to scam change to survive, then I’ll give them a dollar.” My friend grumbled and uttered something about the streets of Manhattan meting out its “New York-style” justice to those who aren’t strong enough to survive, but I ignored the sentiment.

I once wrote that “the poor will always be my brothers and sisters,” and that even though I was raised as “Middle Class,” and had dined with the wealthy and powerful, that I would always feel great empathy for the poor. Being a filmmaker, at least thus far, has not made we wealthy, so I certainly can identify with those who are “one paycheck away from poverty,” and those who are already suffering.

A number of years ago I was dropping off some clothes and food to a soup kitchen in Cleveland. It was a particularly ugly day; temperatures were in the teens and it was snowing like Antarctica. A smiling African American gentleman lept to his feet and opened the door as I approached the entrance. He thanked me for bringing clothes and food to help the poor. I smiled back and proceeded inside where the soup kitchen was about to open.

After dropping off my donation I came back into the winter cold and pulled the collar of my long American Eagle overcoat up around my neck. As I reached my car, I stopped — and turned to look at the man who had opened the door for me. He waved and smiled as the snow continued to swirl around him.

I crossed the street and approached the man, who was in line with about 100 others. I asked him how long he had been coming to the Catholic center for food and he explained that he had lost his job a few months prior and had been unable to find work.

“Where are you sleeping?” I asked.

“Inside, when I can,” he joked.

“And how often is that?” I asked.

“About two times a week,” he said matter-of-factly.

So I took off my oversized American Eagle coat and told him, “You need this more than I.” He was a big man — about 6’2 — and the coat fit him perfectly, even over the layers of shirts and sweaters he’d been wearing.

“God Bless you,” he said to me.

“No sir, may God Bless you,” was my reply.

Over the coming weeks and months, I often saw the man wearing my coat as I made my way downtown. We spoke a number of times after that, and occasionally I would buy him a coffee. My simple act seemed to touch him beyond belief, but I tried to make him realize how much he had taught me; and how he helped put things into perspective.

During today’s horrific economic times, my “family” is hurting again, and the lack of compassion is more startling than ever. I suspect that we’ll see millions more on the streets, in tent villages, and more in the coming months.

Others will judge, rationalize, pontificate about the “scam artists and the bums” living on the streets, but I will not be among them.

Others will hoard and singularize, but to tell you the truth, I am thinking of walking the opposite direction.

If I can create a film about the plight of the poor, I will.

If I have bread to share, I shall.

If I have kindness to give, I will do my best to provide it.

If I can satisfy the afflicted, I will. And yes, if I have a dollar bill to invest in a fellow human, I will give it gladly.

I know I am naïve, but I still believe in the tenet, “There but for the grace of God go I,” and “what you put out comes back.”

For until things change, our humanity is all we have left. It is a perfect opportunity to change — and to evolve — if we so choose.

Godspeed.

Debate Over Drugs For ADHD Reignites: Study Admits Drugs May Have 'Long-Term Risk'

By Shankar Vedantam
Washington Post Staff Writer

New data from a large federal study have reignited a debate over the effectiveness of long-term drug treatment of children with hyperactivity or attention-deficit disorder, and have drawn accusations that some members of the research team have sought to play down evidence that medications do little good beyond 24 months.

The study also indicated that long-term use of the drugs can stunt children's growth.

The latest data paint a very different picture than the study's positive initial results, reported in 1999.

One principal scientist in the study, psychologist William Pelham, said that the most obvious interpretation of the data is that the medications are useful in the short term but ineffective over longer periods but added that his colleagues had repeatedly sought to explain away evidence that challenged the long-term usefulness of medication. When their explanations failed to hold up, they reached for new ones, Pelham said.

"The stance the group took in the first paper was so strong that the people are embarrassed to say they were wrong and we led the whole field astray," said Pelham, of the State University of New York at Buffalo. Pelham said the drugs, including Adderall and Concerta, are among the medications most frequently prescribed for American children, adding: "If 5 percent of families in the country are giving a medication to their children, and they don't realize it does not have long-term benefits but might have long-term risks, why should they not be told?"

The disagreement has produced a range of views among the researchers about how to accurately present the results to the public. One e-mail noted that an academic review of the group's work, called the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With ADHD (MTA), asked why the researchers were "bending over backward" to play down negative implications for drug therapy.

Peter Jensen, one of Pelham's fellow researchers, responded that Pelham was biased against the use of drugs and was substituting his personal opinion for science.

Jensen said Pelham was the only member of the team of researchers who took away "the silly message" that the study raised questions about the long-term utility of drugs, but interviews and e-mails show that Pelham was not alone.

The MTA was designed to test whether children diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, do better when treated with drugs, with drugs plus talk therapy, with talk therapy alone or with routine medical care alone. Children with the disorder have trouble paying attention, are restless and hyperactive, and are sometimes disruptive in school.

The initial 14-month analysis published in 1999 randomly assigned children to one of four treatment options and showed clearly that those treated with medication did much better than those who got only talk therapy or routine care. The drugs' manufacturers distributed thousands of reprints of the article to physicians at a time when diagnoses of ADHD were spiraling upward. Because children given drugs alone appeared to do about as well as those treated with both drugs and talk therapy, the study skewed treatment in the direction of medication.

In a second phase of the study, the researchers followed the children and compared how they fared, but researchers no longer randomly assigned them to the various treatment options, making this phase less scientifically rigorous.

In August 2007, the MTA researchers reported the first follow-up data, which by then no longer showed differences in behavior between children who were medicated and those who were not. But the data did show that children who took the drugs for 36 months were about an inch shorter and six pounds lighter than those who did not.

A news release issued by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) at the time, however, presented the results in a more favorable light. The release, dated July 20, 2007, was titled "Improvement Following ADHD Treatment Sustained in Most Children." The release noted that the initial advantages of drug treatment were no longer evident, but it quoted Jensen as saying this did not mean that long-term drug therapy was ineffective.

Jensen said, "We were struck by the remarkable improvement in symptoms and functioning across all treatment groups." And rather than saying the growth of children on medication was stunted, the release said children who were not on medication "grew somewhat larger."

As the MTA study continued to find smaller and smaller behavioral differences between children who were medicated and those who were not, use of the drugs soared. Pelham said most parents and doctors took away the message that the study had found drug therapy effective over the long run. In 2004, physicians wrote 28.3 million prescriptions for ADHD drugs; last year, they wrote 39.5 million, according to data provided by IMS Health.

With the MTA having followed the children for eight years, the latest data have confirmed that there are no long-term differences between children who were continuously medicated and those who were never medicated. Some of the data were published online yesterday in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

In a telephone interview, Jensen denied that the researchers had misled the public, pointing out that some children getting the drugs did do better over the long term. Looking at overall results was not as useful as studying how particular groups of children fared, he said.

Jensen and another co-author, L. Eugene Arnold at Ohio State University, who are both psychiatrists, emphasized the importance of individualizing treatment -- and warned parents against abruptly terminating drug therapy.

The subgroup analysis found that children in homes that were socially and economically stable did the same in the long term with or without medication. Children from troubled or deprived backgrounds slid backward as soon as the intensive therapy stopped and they went back to their communities. About one-third -- those with the least impairment to begin with -- continued to improve over the long term.

Jensen and co-author Benedetto Vitiello at the NIMH said drugs may not have shown an overall long-term benefit because the quality of routine care that children received may have been inferior to the care they got during the initial part of the study. Jensen said the take-home message is that community care needs improvement.

Brooke Molina, also a co-author and a University of Pittsburgh associate professor of psychology and psychiatry, argued in an e-mail that if the researchers wanted to draw attention to subgroups that might be helped by medication over the long run, they also should acknowledge that "long-term treatment with medication may not be efficacious" for others.

In an interview, Molina said the data do not "support that children who stay on medication longer than two years have better outcomes than children who don't." In an e-mail she shared with Pelham, she noted that academic "reviewers thought we were bending over backward (inappropriately) to dismiss the failure to find medication effects at 8 years."

James Swanson, another MTA co-author and a psychologist at the University of California at Irvine, said he believes that the researchers have been open about the diminishing benefits of medication therapy. He cited a variety of scientific publications in which he and others reported data showing that medications lost effectiveness over time and stunted growth.

"If you want something for tomorrow, medication is the best, but if you want something three years from now, it does not matter," he said. "If you take medication long-term beyond three years, I don't think there is any evidence that medication is better than no medication."

Pelham, who has conducted many drug therapy studies, said the drugs have a valuable role: They buy parents and clinicians time to teach youngsters behavioral strategies to combat inattention and hyperactivity. Over the long term, he said, parents need to rely on those skills.

A yet-to-be-published study, Pelham added, found that 95 percent of parents who were told by clinicians to first try behavioral interventions for ADHD did so. When parents were given a prescription for a drug and then told to enroll their children in behavioral intervention programs, 75 percent did not seek out the behavioral approaches.

SEN. GRASSLEY TO FDA: WE WILL PROTECT WHISTLEBLOWERS

Senator Chuck Grassley today said that employees of the Food and Drug Administration deserve clarification from the Acting Commissioner about their ability to communicate with Congress and the Inspector General following a memo issued last week that warned employees about releasing information. Grassley stated that he would indeed protect whistleblowers like FDAs Dr. David Graham (pictured above), and that Federal statutes guarantee their safety and protection.

"Federal laws protect whistleblowers and allow people who work in the federal bureaucracy to discuss what's happening inside an agency with other officials. Attempts to silence whistleblowers are illegal," Grassley said. "If the memo sent last week was intended to have a chilling effect on FDA employees who want to speak up about problems, then that memo is contrary to the President's call for open and transparent government, and the Acting Commissioner needs to set the record straight."

Grassley is a longtime advocate for whistleblower protections for federal employees. He co-authored the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989, and has co-sponsored legislation to update the law. Grassley also conducts extensive congressional oversight. He has sought administrative and legislative reforms to address problems he has revealed at the Food and Drug Administration during the last five years.

Last month, Grassley urged President Obama to have a Rose Garden ceremony honoring federal whistleblowers to send a message from the top of the executive branch to the bottom that "speaking the truth" deserves rewards not reprisals for exposing mismanagement and fraud, waste and abuse of tax dollars. This month, Grassley sharply protested the President's signing statement on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the economic stimulus bill, for the way it contradicts campaign pledges and promises to protect whistleblowers.

The text of the letter Grassley sent today to the Acting Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration is below.


March 24, 2009

Frank M. Torti, MD, MPH
Acting Commissioner
U.S. Food and Drug Administration
5600 Fishers Lane
Rockville, MD 20857

Dear Dr. Torti:

As a senior member of the United States Senate and the Ranking Member of the Committee on Finance (Committee), I have a duty under the Constitution to conduct oversight into the actions of executive branch agencies, including the activities of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA/Agency). In this capacity, I work to ensure that FDA is completing its mission to protect the public's health and makes responsible use of the public funding provided for medical studies. Decisions made by FDA often form the basis for action taken by the Medicaid and Medicare programs which fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Committee.

I am concerned about a recent memorandum you sent to FDA employees warning them of their obligations to keep certain information confidential. While I appreciate the fact that some information, including certain business trade secrets, needs to be protected from unauthorized disclosures, I have serious concerns that your memorandum goes beyond legitimate privacy concerns and appears to run contrary to many statutes protecting executive branch communications with members of Congress.

Specifically, your memorandum notes that certain information acquired from businesses and industry is protected as confidential and may only be disclosed in limited circumstances. Your memorandum cited the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the Trade Secrets Act, and the Privacy Act, as well as FDA regulations as the controlling authority for determining when a document or information may be disclosed. You added that FDA employees who violate these provisions may face disciplinary sanctions and criminal liability.

I appreciate your concerns with protecting confidential information from unauthorized disclosures. These protections play an important role in allowing business and industry to work cooperatively with regulatory agencies. However, I am concerned with the timing of your memorandum, given some recent high profile matters concerning your Agency and the release of information that has shown failures in FDA's regulatory mission. My concern is that this recent memorandum could be viewed by some as an effort to chill and/or prevent FDA employees from exercising their rights under whistleblower protection laws to communicate with Congress.

Fox example, internal FDA documents released recently seem to suggest that lobbying may have influenced the decision in a device approval.[1] Another internal document shows that a physician was removed for inappropriate reasons from a recent safety panel.[2] In both, cases, I do not believe that Congress would be notified unless whistleblowers spoke up.

Dr. Torti, I have been an outspoken advocate for whistleblowers and have authored numerous whistleblower protection provisions. Whistleblowers are some of the most patriotic people I know—men and women who labor, often anonymously, to let Congress and the American people know when the Government isn't working so we can fix it. As such, it would have been prudent for you to include a section in your memorandum that outlines the interplay between protected confidential and trade secret information and making protected disclosures to Congress and/or Inspectors General in accordance with the whistleblower protection laws. Absent such a discussion, many FDA employees could take this memo to mean that they could be criminally sanctioned for providing information to Congress.

As you may be aware, 18 U.S.C. § 1505 states, in pertinent part:
Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress —

Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.

Additionally, denying or interfering with employees' rights to furnish information to Congress is also against the law. I have attached another copy of 5 U.S.C. § 7211 to this letter for your reference. That law states:

The right of employees, individually or collectively, to petition Congress or a Member of Congress, or to furnish information to either House of Congress, or to a committee or Member thereof, may not be interfered with or denied.

Finally, federal officials who deny or interfere with employees' rights to furnish information to Congress are not entitled to have their salaries paid by taxpayers' dollars. I have attached a copy of P.L. 111-5 § 714 to this letter for your reference, which states:

No part of any appropriation contained in this or any other Act shall be available for the payment of the salary of any officer or employee of the Federal Government, who —

(1) prohibits or prevents, or attempts or threatens to prohibit or prevent, any other officer or employee of the Federal Government from having any direct oral or written communication or contact with any Member, committee, or subcommittee of the Congress in connection with any matter pertaining to the employment of such other officer or employee or pertaining to the department or agency of such other officer or employee in any way, irrespective of whether such communication or contact is at the initiative of such other officer or employee or in response to the request or inquiry of such Member, committee, or subcommittee; or
(2) removes, suspends from duty without pay, demotes, reduces in rank, seniority, stats, pay, or performance of efficiency rating, denies promotion to, relocates, reassigns, transfers, disciplines, or discriminates in regard to any employment right, entitlement, or benefit, or any term or condition of employment of, any other officer or employee of the Federal Government, or attempts or threatens to commit any of the foregoing actions with respect to such other officer or employee, by reason of any communication or contact of such other officer or employee with any Member, committee, or subcommittee of the Congress as described in paragraph (1).
FDA employees have the right to talk to Congress and to provide Congress with information free and clear of Agency influence. Further, these employees have the right to be free from fear of retaliation or reprisal. You should review these important statutes and reevaluate the message sent by your memorandum. I believe that you should take the further step of issuing a second memorandum to FDA employees outlining their rights and whistleblower protections, as well as outlining the FDA's responsibilities for respecting those protected disclosures. Such a memorandum would go a long way toward ensuring that the FDA remains "committed to the principles of open Government and transparency" as you stated in your memorandum.

Sincerely,
Charles E. Grassley
Ranking Member



*Photo of Dr. David Graham: New York Times

CONTAMINATED VACCINES DISCOVERED - COULD HAVE KILLED HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS

A large consignment of seasonal flu vaccine, which was due to be circulated to 18 European countries, has been infected with deadly live avian flu virus. Had the contamination not been detected, the vaccines may have started an avian flu pandemic, killing hundreds of thousands of people.

The World Health Organization is carrying out investigations at the Austrian research facility of Baxter International, the pharmaceutical company, where the contamination happened. Baxter has confirmed that the consignment contained live H5N1 virus, which causes avian flu.

A researcher in the Czech Republic discovered the lethal contamination when laboratory ferrets that he had injected with the H3N2 flu vaccine suddenly died. The H5N1 virus becomes lethal as an injection only when it is mixed with H3N2, a process known as reassortment.

The WHO investigation team says it doesn’t have evidence to suggest that Baxter had deliberately reassorted the two viruses, but “what remains unanswered are the circumstances surrounding the incident in the Baxter facility,” a WHO official said.

Despite dire warnings from health officials, no avian flu pandemic has occurred as human-to-human infection hasn’t happened. So far, several hundred people have died after catching the virus from poultry, although governments have warned that millions would die if people could infect each other.

Baxter is currently working on a new type of avian flu vaccine, called Celvapan, which is based on cell culture technology. The technology, which is being developed at Baxter’s research facility in the Czech Republic, by-passes the conventional process where a virus is incubated in chicken eggs. Instead, Baxter is working with the ‘native’ virus that does not need to be modified.

Last year the vaccine passed the first two phases of safety trials, and Baxter announced that “Celvapan combines innovative science and breakthrough production technology with the aim of protecting people against an H5N1 pandemic flu infection.”

(Sources: Toronto Sun, February 27, 2009; New England Journal of Medicine, 2008; 358: 2573-84).
by Healthy News Service

“Generation RX” highlights the dangers of mood-altering drugs on youth

by Meaghan S. Earley

In his latest documentary “Generation RX,” local filmmaker Kevin P. Miller explores the painful (and sometimes fatal) side effects of mood-altering drugs and the impact they have on our nation’s youth.

In this timely film, Miller shows why parents who trust their doctors are quick to place their children on these drugs — and why the decision is often unwise.

“If medicine is to be trusted,” he says, “integrity and ethics must be at its core.” Miller’s ability to adequately portray life
issues in his films are due to his ability to empathize with his subjects.

“... I’ve always tried to walk a mile in the shoes of the afflicted so that I could communicate to the reader or the audience a genuine sense of their suffering and angst,” he says.

Speaking with the parents who have lost their children is heartbreaking, to say the least. But behind the pain is a story driven by common sense — something Miller hopes his film illustrates.

“When people watched [“Generation RX”], they could truly see how illogical and dangerous it is to mass-drug children with
‘speed’ or other psychiatric medicines,” he says. Miller hopes “Generation RX” will touch parents, teachers and college students alike andthat everyone will re-examine their reasons for giving children these drugs.

“If we had more ‘talking’ and behavioral therapy, and less drugging with these powerful intoxicants,” he says, “our society would be far better off.”

–Meaghan S. Earley
from CIFF Daily
an Official Publication of the Cleveland International Film Festival

AP: GERMAN SHOOTER "UNDERWENT TREATMENT FOR DEPRESSION" AT PSYCH CLINIC - ARE SSRIs ONCE AGAIN THE CULPRIT?

By VANESSA GERA and MELISSA EDDY, Associated Press Writers

WINNENDEN, Germany – The psychological profile of a teenager who went on a shooting spree at his former school and killed 15 people began to take shape Thursday, as investigators described a withdrawn young man from an intact family who broke off psychiatric treatment for depression.

But investigators faced a setback as they struggled to authenticate a chat room posting that purportedly warned of a bloody rampage hours before 17-year-old Tim Kretschmer wreaked havoc on this quiet town near Stuttgart, southwest Germany.
Kretschmer returned to his former high school on Wednesday to kill nine students and three teachers before fleeing on foot and by car, killing three more people, and eventually turning a 9 mm Beretta pistol on himself after a shootout with police.

A joint statement released late Thursday by regional police and Stuttgart prosecutors said that, "in the course of the afternoon, doubts arose about the veracity of the Internet chat."

Police spokesman Klaus Hinderer said a search of Kretschmer's computer had shown no trace of his having made the chat room posting.

A message posted Thursday to the site — krautchan.net — said, "No killing spree was announced here." Prosecutors said they were trying to reach the U.S.-based provider of the site.

Across Germany, government buildings lowered their flags to half staff Thursday, while schools held moments of silence for the victims. Germany's national soccer league, the Bundesliga, said players would wear black armbands in upcoming games.
In Winnenden, hundreds of people filed into a church in a drizzle after dark for a prayer service. A crowd of many more watched on a large video screen outside as a message of condolence from Pope Benedict XVI, a fellow German, was read aloud.
Throughout the day, students and residents paid homage to the dead outside the school, where they lit candles and laid tulips, roses, handwritten notes and stuffed animals in a memorial.

Fourteen-year-old Kristin Puengel said a friend of hers was among the eight girls killed. Three female teachers and a boy were also shot in the school. Another three men were killed as Kretschmer fled police.

She said she only knew Kretschmer — who appeared in pictures shown on German television to be a dark-haired teen with glasses and short sideburns — by sight, but that he was not a friend.

"He was somewhat withdrawn, but I would never have thought (he would be capable) of anything like this," Puengel said.
Authorities and friends said that although Kretschmer played table tennis and lifted weights, his main hobbies appeared to be shooting and spending hours on his computer — where investigators said they found pornographic films, violent computer games and a collection of horror and action films that included "Rambo First Blood," "Freddy vs. Jason," and "The Marksman."
Officials said he had been interested in a girl of about his own age, but that the feelings were apparently never reciprocated.
"It didn't work out," said Ralf Michelfelder, police chief in the nearby town of Waiblingen.

Kretschmer's father was a well-off businessman who legally owned 15 weapons and belonged to a gun club where his son regularly turned up for target practice, said Baden Wuerttemburg state Interior Minister Heribert Rech.
"He was well-trained in firing weapons," Rech said of the teen.

The teen, who graduated from Albertville high school with average grades in 2008, underwent several treatment sessions for depression at a psychiatric clinic that year, said investigator Siegfried Mahler. He showed up for five sessions between April and September, and was expected to continue outpatient therapy at a different clinic, but never began it, Mahler said.
Although authorities said he had struggled in school, Kretschmer was studying sales at a vocational school.

Authorities said they found some 60 shell casings in the school and that the number of victims could have been much higher had educators and police not carried out a plan learned in an earlier training program preparing them to respond to such a shooting.

When the first police squads arrived minutes later, they immediately stormed the building, under fire from Kretschmer as they came up the stairs before chasing him from the building, said state police president Erwin Hetger.

"We know from previous school shootings that the perpetrators only stop when they run out of ammunition, when they feel threatened by the police, or when they take their own lives," Hetger said.

"This gunman had more than 250 bullets on him when he entered the school," Hetger said.
___
Melissa Eddy reported from Berlin.

SUPREME COURT REJECTS LIMITS ON DRUG LAWSUITS

On November 3, 2008 I wrote A SUPREME TEST OF PATIENTS' RIGHTS about the case of Diana Levine, who lost her arm because of a botched injection of an anti-nausea medication. She sued Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, who claimed that since their drug was approved by federal regulators at the FDA, that Wyeth should bear no financial responsibility for Ms. Levine's tragic loss.

"For the nation," I wrote then, "Wyeth's appeal of a $6.7 million verdict Levine won from a Vermont state jury has far reaching consequences. Backed by the Bush administration, Wyeth argued that "once a drug's warning label gets FDA approval, consumers cannot pursue state law claims that they were harmed.”

Today comes the breaking news that Wyeth's appeal to the Supreme Court has been rejected. Thus, health freedom has been preserved for another day, thanks to Diana Levine.


SUPREME COURT REJECTS LIMITS ON DRUG LAWSUITS

By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a $6.7 million jury award to a musician who lost her arm because of a botched injection of an anti-nausea medication. The court brushed away a plea for limiting lawsuits against drug makers.
In a 6-3 decision, the court rejected Wyeth Pharmaceuticals' claim that federal approval of its Phenergan anti-nausea drug should have shielded the company from lawsuits like the one filed by Diana Levine of Vermont.

Levine, 63, struggled with her emotions when told of the ruling in a phone call from an Associated Press reporter Wednesday: "Oh, my God. I'm so, so happy. I can't believe this phone call," she said.

"I've been waiting for so long, and I had no idea of what the chances were. I'm just ecstatic. I'm going to have to sit down," said Levine, once a professional guitar and piano player. She now plays with one hand, and sings.

Levine's lawsuit said she wasn't sufficiently warned of the risks of using Phenergan. But Bert Rein, a Washington lawyer who represents Wyeth, said the company's label complied with federal law.

"The medical and scientific experts at FDA are in the best position to weigh the risks and benefits of a medicine and to assess how those risks and benefits should be described in the product's label," Rein said in a statement.

Wyeth is in the process of being bought by rival Pfizer, Inc., in a $68 billion deal that is expected to close later this year.
The decision is the second this term to reject business groups' arguments that federal regulation effectively pre-empts consumer complaints under state law.

A Vermont jury agreed with Levine's claim that Wyeth failed to provide a strong and clear warning about the risks of quickly injecting the drug into a vein, a method called IV push. Gangrene is likely if the injection accidentally hits an artery — precisely what happened to Levine.

The company appealed and, backed by the Bush administration, argued that once a drug's warning label gets approval from the Food and Drug Administration, the label can't be changed without further FDA approval and consumers cannot pursue state law claims that they were harmed.

Justice John Paul Stevens, writing the majority opinion, said Wyeth could "unilaterally strengthen its warning."
Stevens said he was persuaded that until a recent change by the FDA, the agency "traditionally regarded state law as a complementary form of drug regulation" because it monitors 11,000 drugs.

Justice Clarence Thomas agreed with the outcome of the case, but did not join Stevens' opinion.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote a dissent that was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia.
"This case illustrates that tragic facts make bad law," Alito said. "The court holds that a state tort jury, rather than the Food and Drug Administration, is ultimately responsible for regulating warning labels for prescription drugs."

The FDA has approved the use of Phenergan by injection, including the method at issue in Levine's case. The drug has been available for decades to treat nausea and when used properly, both sides agree it is safe and effective.

The Bush administration and business groups aggressively pushed limits on lawsuits through the doctrine of pre-emption — asserting the primacy of federal regulation over rules that might differ from state to state.

The Supreme Court had largely agreed, ruling last term that FDA approval shields medical devices from most lawsuits. That case turned on a provision of federal law prohibiting states from imposing their own requirements on the devices.
The Levine case drew a lot of attention because the administration and Wyeth contended that, although the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act lacks a similar provision, drug manufacturers also are protected from most suits over federally approved drugs.

Stevens said there could be circumstances where consumer lawsuits would not be allowed, including if the FDA had considered and rejected a stronger warning label.

But that was not the case with Phenergan, he said. "As we have discussed, the FDA did not consider and reject a stronger warning against IV-push injection of Phenergan," Stevens said.

Justice Stephen Breyer agreed in a brief, separate opinion. "It is also possible that state tort law will sometimes interfere with the FDA's desire to create a drug label containing a specific set of cautions and instructions," Breyer said.
The case is Wyeth v. Levine, 06-1249.
___
Associated Press writer John Curran contributed reporting from Montpelier, Vt.


######

MED STUDENTS PUT HARVARD CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST POLICIES UNDER THE MICROSCOPE

by Alexandra Andrews, ProPublica

Two rival gangs are battling it out at Harvard Medical School. No, they're not fashioning makeshift weapons out of stethoscopes and tongue depressors, but there are millions of dollars at stake, along with what some say is Harvard's reputation.

The first group, made up of around 200 students and faculty members, is "intent on exposing and curtailing the industry influence in their classrooms and laboratories, as well as in Harvard's 17 affiliated teaching hospitals and institutes," reports today's New York Times.

Harvard recently earned an F from the American Medical Student Association, which grades medical schools' conflict-of-interest policies on money from the pharmaceutical industry, even as other top-tier schools like the University of Pennsylvania, Stanford and Columbia secured A's and B's.

Harvard also faced embarrassment last year when Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) accused two of its psychiatrists of potentially breaking federal and university conflict-of-interest rules by failing to fully report huge fees from drug companies.

A first-year Harvard Medical student tells the Times:

Before coming here, I had no idea how much influence companies had on medical education. And it's something that's purposely meant to be under the table, providing information under the guise of education when that information is also presented for marketing purposes.

But there's another faction that thinks industry funds have gotten an unfair rap, and it insists that they're a necessity. The medical school's new dean, Dr. Jeffrey Flier, seems to agree to a certain extent. According to the Times, Flier doesn't want to "tighten the spigot" on industry money: "One entirely appropriate source, if done properly, is industrial funds," he said.

But Flier also "wants Harvard to catch up with the best practices at other leading medical schools." He recently formed a 19-member committee to "re-examine" Harvard's conflict-of-interest policies, which the Times says currently do not require faculty members "to report specific amounts received for speaking or consulting, other than broad indications like 'more than $30,000.'" Nor are there "limits on companies' making outright gifts to faculty -- free meals, tickets, trips or the like."

On the other hand, Harvard Medical School does require all professors and lecturers to "disclose their industry ties in class -- a blanket policy that has been adopted by no other leading medical school."

The committee examining these policies will meet on Thursday, but any suggestions to sever the school's ties with industry will likely meet a wall of opposition. The school's Web site has this to say on ties between "biomedical research institutions" and the industry: "The Harvard Faculty of Medicine remains strongly committed to continued growth in these innovative and mutually beneficial relationships." In other words, they're probably not going away any time soon.


####

THE WISDOM OF COMMON PEOPLE

I have learned so much by simply listening to the people I’ve met while producing my films LET TRUTH BE THE BIAS, WE BECOME SILENT, and most recently GENERATION RX. As journalists, as Producers, we are supposed to be good listeners — we are supposed to be the link to reason, to balance, and to well-researched wisdom.

This kind of wisdom, however, can come only from meeting countless someones scattered across the globe, people who willingly bare their souls for the sake of the greater good. By sharing their health challenges, big and small, and by stepping forward to be counted, the wisdom of common people allows the masses to judge on their own whether they believe natural cures are a viable option. I write about this again in GENERATION RX near the conclusion of the film.

At a recent public appearance in Philadelphia, I was asked, “Who will lead us in the fight for health freedom?” The question alluded to the threats against health freedom such as Codex Alimentarius and the ongoing threat to DSHEA, the Dietary Supplement Health Education Act. His question resonated throughout the hall, and in the moments that followed his words echoed rather eerily through the auditorium.

The audience leaned forward, waiting for my answer. Here is what I told them.

During the 1990s, a juggernaut of real-people coalitions came together with industry forces, bound by their desire to both prevent the monoliths of medicine from exerting their capitalistic notions over all of us, and to preserve “medical freedom of choice.” Those who came together to fight for justice represented the plurality of America, and came from every political, racial, religious and socio-economic stratum. The amazing happened: people actually put aside their differences and forced Congress to honor their wishes. . .a rare occurrence in American political life.

Collectively, they unearthed a new day in America—a time when the wisdom of common people became not only relevant, but also dominant. Millions—no, tens of millions stood up to the forces of power and money and called for change. They besieged Washington with millions of letters, faxes, and phone calls. As a result, DSHEA, the greatest health law written heretofore, passed in an overwhelming fashion.

“You are the people who accomplished that,” I emphatically reminded them. “You made the calls, you passed out the literature, you wrote the letters, YOU created a your own kind of pre-internet blogs, and passed the word across the nation.”

These days, however, this wonderful consortium of individuals and interests has become divided by a myriad of so-called health freedom leaders. We have lazily allowed others to do the thinking for us—and the results have been toxic, to say the least. Certain vitamin, herbal and health food trade associations—among others—have replaced the wisdom of common people with the elitist attitude that “only we know what’s right for consumers,” and dismissed those who sounded the alarm about Codex and other health freedom issues as “alarmists.” They seem to have forgotten that is the loyal buyer, the local or regional health advocates—through thousands of health food stores, co-ops, and doctors’ offices—who made DSHEA happen. In truth, it is we consumers who fund the vitamin and health food industries in the first place, so it’s time we made our voices heard again.

As I told the crowd in Philadelphia, quit waiting for leaders to lead. . .you might not like where they are taking you. It may be a tired adage, but it is true nonetheless: think globally and act locally.

The people who say “Codex is no threat to us here in the USA,” well, let them know that you disagree with them. Email, call, fax, blog, and write letters-to-the-editor. In short, do whatever you can—communicate in the strongest terms possible—and tell them what you think. If you see a story on the local news, call or write to voice your displeasure. You are in charge of our collective health freedom—and the time for allowing others to do the work for you is over.

As health advocate Scott Tips of the National Health Federation often says, “be persistently vocal,” don’t give up—and don’t give in.

Arm yourself with information from trusted sources like Dr. Robert Verkerk’s Alliance for Natural Health (http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/) in the UK, the Dr. Rath Health Foundation (http://www.dr-rath-foundation.org/), and the National Health Federation (http://www.thenhf.com/) and Mike Adams. These are credible websites for consumers to examine, and I will share more action links in future blogs.

Finally, for those who believe Codex, CAFTA, the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), and our membership in the WTO don’t impact health freedom, simply go to the web and see my documentary WE BECOME SILENT. It was put online free as a service to consumers—and you can spread the word by referring people to the website or by buying this film, which is narrated by the world-class UK actress Dame Judi Dench.

We live in an Age when the issues are so immensely complicated. The reality is that most people need reliable and easy-to-understand information in order to form an intelligent opinion. My films are a resource but there are many others as well.

Multi-national food and drug companies are edging us closer to the precipice. If we don’t act soon, we will fail to preserve the hard-fought health freedom efforts of the past 20-30 years. . . and we could find ourselves facing a new allopathic version of the Dark Ages for generations to come.

The wisdom of common people is what we need — as we fight for our right to preserve not only our basic access to vitamins and minerals, but to the ancient medicines that preceded them.

Roll up your sleeves, do your research and be a critical thinker.

Then, get busy — and spread the word as if your life depends on it.

GENERATION RX Finds Massive Support Through Social Media Websites Like Facebook, Twitter

Generation Rx is a new documentary film by international award winning filmmaker, Kevin P. Miller. The film focuses on significant ethical conflicts and the high mental and physical health risks associated with a widespread propensity to prescribe psychiatric drugs for children.

Significant exposure of the film's two trailers on social content web sites like Facebook, MySpace, YouTube and Google Video has helped "Generation Rx" realize an increasingly popular position among students, teachers, counselors and a wide range of consumer and special interest groups. YouTube quickly generated nearly 50,000 viewings of the film’s trailer after its online release and Google Video gives it a “5 Star” rating.

Perhaps it is no wonder why the film is becoming increasingly popular through online venues. It addresses many of the alarming issues surrounding the growing use of ADHD drugs, antidepressants, and anti-psychotic medications among children and teenagers worldwide. Issues that are being covered more and more in the mainstream press and their online outlets.

The film documents how an entire era of children has been caught in the middle of an unprecedented change in Western culture: that of drugging children with psychiatric medications earlier and more often than ever before.

"For decades, scores of doctors, government officials, journalists, and others have extolled the benefits of psychiatric medicines for children," said Miller, the film's writer, producer and director. "Generation RX unveils 'the rest of the story' and explains how this era of unprecedented change in Western culture really occurred -- and what price has been paid by society."

By employing the expertise of internationally respected professionals from the fields of medicine, ethics, journalism, and academia, Kevin P. Miller investigates whether collusion between drug companies and their regulatory watchdogs at the FDA exists. He also focuses on the powerful stories of real families who followed the advice of their doctors -- and faced devastating consequences for doing so.

Ultimately, Miller says, "Generation RX may help parents decide whether the perceived benefits of these medications outweigh the serious risks to children."

Generation Rx is getting some interesting support from other sectors as well. Critics and Hollywood insiders have already begun hailing "Generation RX" as one of the best documentaries of 2008. Paul Haggis, the back-to-back Academy Award® winning Writer/Director said, "Generation RX is a powerful and often chilling eye-opener. Weeks after viewing, the stories continue to haunt me."

Mike Adams, publisher of NewsTarget and Natural News, says the film "delivers a jaw-dropping emotional ride," and "weaves a terrifying tale of criminal conspiracy. It is one of the best films of 2008."

Jason Buchanan of the "All Movie Guide" stated, "Generation RX is a film that every parent should see."

"Generation RX" was released by Common Radius Films, an Independent media company based in Vancouver, British Columbia.

"Generation RX" is available through the film's website at www.GenerationRxFilm.com. The film’s two trailers are available on YouTube, Facebook, Google Video and other community and social content web sites using key words “Generation Rx.”

# # #

Rudi C. Loehwing is a Los Angeles-based broadcast journalist and the founder of the World Institution of Natural Health Sciences www.winhs.org

PRESCRIPTION FOR TROUBLE

By CHRIS WILLIAMS
Detroit Source Staff Writer

More than a decade ago, drugs such as Paxil, Zoloft and Prozac were known only to a handful of patients. Today, the medications are household names, prescribed to millions of people across the country, including teenagers and children.

In 1993, documentarian Kevin P. Miller came across a series of videotaped testimonies involving parents who were suing the Food and Drug Administration for what they claimed were harmful side effects caused by the medications.

Over the years, Miller accessed nearly 400 pages of transcripts from the proceedings and amassed material he said proves the FDA has approved the medications, even though they are aware the medications have harmful side effects that can cause aggression, depression and even suicide in younger patients.

“It planted a seed in me and I knew I wanted to explore it as a film,” said Miller, the director of “Let Truth Be the Bias” and “The Promised Land.” “I really wanted to explore these things further and let people know what the issues are.”

The result was “Generation RX,” a documentary that debuted in 2008 and will play at the AMC Forum 30 in Sterling Heights on Feb. 23. The film employs the expertise of journalists, academic professionals and medical doctors to discuss the collusion between drug companies and the FDA, and the effect on families whose children have been affected by the use of prescription medication.

“What we hope to do is present a common-sense path toward questions we really should be asking ourselves,” said Miller. “Are we experimenting on our kids with these massive uses of prescription drugs and antidepressants?”

In the film, Miller talks to a handful of experts about the dangers of prescription drugs, and shares faxes and other evidence he said represent collaboration between the FDA and drug companies to get medicine approved even though harmful side effects were known to exist. One side that refused to participate, however, were officials at the FDA.

“I didn’t have a chance to talk to the people who were involved in the trials in 1991 and 1993 because it was so long ago that it was nearly impossible to locate them. And the sad reality is that the FDA doesn’t talk to the press,” he said. “They only talk to the media when they have an agenda ... It saddens me, really. There’s no reason for it. I believe in medical freedom of choice. If you share all the scientific information that’s available to consumers, good or bad, they should be able to make their own decisions.”

Miller said that, despite the FDA’s repeated assurances there is no cause for concern, there have been hundreds of cases about teenagers who were prescribed medication who experienced depression, including suicidal tendencies. He said it’s shocking that young children are being prescribed this medication and that they are not being warned of the effects of withdrawal from antidepressants; most suicides occur within three weeks of stopping the medication.

“It’s bad enough when it happens in adults, but when you’re prescribing antidepressants to an 11-year-old girl and she hangs herself in the garage, it’s unthinkable,” he said. “My vision of an 11-year-old girl does not include her hanging herself. And yet, that’s what is happening.”

The film was finished in 2008 and has begun being sold from Miller’s Web site as well as being entered in film festivals across the world. Miller said the reaction has been strongly positive, including raves from “Crash” director Paul Haggis.

“We’ve gotten some great reviews and we’ve been accepted into several festivals,” he said. “I get letters every day from people who say they’re so thankful for this film because it helps them know that they’re not alone. It’s really heartening hearing that.”

“Generation RX” will screen Feb. 23 at the AMC Forum 30 in Sterling Heights at 7:30 p.m. with producer and director Kevin Miller in attendance. The event is sponsored by Maximized Living Doctors. Tickets are available for $5. For more information, call 978-8088 or visit www.generationrxfilm.com

Click here to read story:
http://www.sourcenewspapers.com/stories/022209/loc_story4001.shtml

YUAN FEN

DON’T TELL MY MOM I SAID THIS, but someone once told me — in the strictest of confidence — that my mother “fell in love every month” until she met and married my Dad. Having waited until I was “mature enough” to get married — only to get divorced a few years later — I guess I can understand how even my Mom could have enjoyed years of fickle feelings before having her heart set ablaze by my Dad. It seems like human nature, especially in the context of relationships in the 21st century.

Of course, once Mom made a decision, that was that. There would be no looking back. Many decades later, Mom and Dad remained true to their vows. . .and very much in love.

Many of our Moms and Dads — members of “the greatest generation” — have enjoyed similar longevity in matrimony. Today, however, with marriages lasting between 6-7 years on average, one must ask if the “Me Generation” is truly able to keep a commitment . . .about anything.

This uneasy, chronic dissatisfaction is all around us. I was having dinner with a very successful, affluent, female medical doctor a few years ago when the conversation shifted to relationships. “What is it with men?” she asked. “And why is it that you are all unwilling to get married?” She outlined her case against men very firmly, beginning with, “Men don’t want companionship, they want control,” before adding, “men won’t marry a powerful woman with a great career…especially if they make less money than a woman.”

“Is it REALLY that, Doctor?” I recall asking. “Is it that men are afraid of powerful women? Or is it that we live in this ‘Me’ centered universe, devoid of loyalty and unconditional love? Could it be that we live in an age where few have the patience, the tolerance, or capacity to forgive — like children forgive their parents on a weekly basis — and that we are living our lives as if life is always greener on the other side of the mountain?”

She seemed perplexed, and we went on like that for hours. Maybe something resonated with her, however, as six months later she reported back that she had indeed found her man, and was engaged to be married.

Thus, is there anything more beautiful — or maddening — than love? We see it portrayed in movies, television, books and magazines all of the time, of course, but while they do justice to the word in an imaginary, Hollywood-kind-of-a-way, do we really know what the reality of love is?

I wonder.

Yeah, I have cried every single time I hear Renee Zellweger say the line “You had me at ‘Hello” in the movie Jerry Maguire. EVERY SINGLE TIME it’s spoken. I think it touches a raw nerve of unfulfilled love within me, and allows a deep and abiding sadness to surface. Is it only because of ‘Hollywood magic’ that this takes place? Am I being manipulated by the cold orchestrated efforts of the media machine to go see the next Cameron Crowe movie? Well, perhaps.

Yet when this sadness occurs, it highlights that those feelings within me — no matter how glorified or artificial they may appear in Hollywood — do indeed exist. Is it because Renee Zellweger’s character is so willing to accept Jerry Maguire, a man full of vanity and failures and flaws, at his lowest ebb?

If we are looking for love at all, that is what keeps most of us believing that there is one perfect woman/man out there in the Universe. It is the unconditional, the solid-as-a-rock notion that “I will stand beside you always…even when you are broken…” that keeps us coming back for more.

The Chinese have a concept called “Yuan Fen,” for which no direct translation exists in the English language. It is a visual, contextual combination of destiny, tried-and-true effort and, well, luck. Yuan Fen, like so many things Chinese, is a karmic phrase meant to illustrate the importance of fate and diligence in our lives. For a relationship to work, one needs both “yuan,” the fateful, pre-destined meeting of a man and a woman that creates the possibility of lasting love — and the “fen,” or the action of sharing and WORKING toward fulfilling that destiny together.

It is a lovely concept, at least to me. Yuan Fen acknowledges the need for shared energy and commitment to make “the dream come true.” There can be no “fen” without “yuan.” Without hard work and a little luck, there can also be no yuan fen. In my opinion, this is the part of the equation which alienates those of us in Western culture. . .because let’s face it, if things get tough in relationships, most of us cut-and-run.

Our lack of commitment — our unwillingness to stand shoulder to shoulder during difficult times — is probably the simplest reflection of life in the material age, and a society built on instant gratification.

IT IS NOW NEARLY 15 YEARS since my first-and-only wife divorced. We definitely did not experience ‘yuan fen,’ but I love and admire her just the same.

Nonetheless, today on Valentine’s Day, I still believe in the idea that fate and destiny and hard-work are delivering my yuan fen to me as we speak. It is the “eternal optimist” in me. Some of you may think that my beliefs make me a naïve idiot. Well. . .whatever. I still believe that love will complete the circle, one way or another.

My prayer is that you find your “yuan fen” as well. . .and that you will be willing to work for your blessings, like so many in “the greatest generation” did before us.

Happy Valentine’s Day. . .and peace to you all.

Codex misinformation creates public confusion

RELEASED BY THE ALLIANCE FOR NATURAL HEALTH
There is presently a lot of information circulating on the internet about Codex [2]—and its potential imminent impact on the banning of food (dietary) supplements including vitamins, minerals and herbs — that is inaccurate.

The misinformation is feeding people’s fears and is preventing them, especially in Europe, from using what democratic powers still remain to influence legal processes that will, in the short-term, have a far bigger impact on their access to natural health products. This is particularly the case for the nearly 500 million people living in the 27 Member States of Europe, where it is European Directives and Regulations that present the main risk to their continued access to beneficial natural health products.

Much of the misinformation appears to stem from the US-based Natural Solutions Foundation (NSF), and in particular, a youtube-released video called Nutricide featuring NSF's medical director, Dr Rima Laibow.

For two different assessments of the relevance of Codex to natural health—which should go a long way towards helping you to separate the facts from the myths—please refer to the two articles referenced below:

ANH’s newly revised Codex campaign page [1] (that now also deals directly with the issue of Codex misinformation)
An article, ‘Codex and Health Freedom—Beware of the ‘Instant Experts [3]’ on the Dr Rath Foundation website.

WILL CODEX BAN FOOD SUPPLEMENTS BEGINNING DECEMBER 31, 2009?

One of the rumours that abounds suggests that Codex will ban a wide variety of food supplements as of 31 December 2009. This is wrong. This date refers to the end of the transition phase of the European Food Supplements Directive [4] which brings in a ban after this date of any vitamin or mineral food supplement that has yet to be approved on the Directive's positive list (Annex II).

This means that many food supplements containing vitamins and minerals that have not been approved as safe and bioavailable by the European Food Safety Authority [5] will indeed be banned from 1 January 2010. But it is not Codex that is causing these bans—it is the European Directive. The same European Directive will also likely impose restrictions on maximum dosages on vitamins and minerals in 2010—and this is something that the ANH, together with a number of other organisations, such as the Irish Association of Health Stores [6], are working very hard to counter [7]. But again, these restrictions on dosages are not the result of Codex, but are the effects of the EU Directive.

In fact, it is the mechanism by which restrictions are occurring in Europe that are forming the basis for the Codex Guideline on Vitamin and Mineral Food Supplements [8]—which is just one of some 300 guidelines and standards to be produced by the inter-governmental Codex Alimentarius Commission [2].

At present, the US-based National Health Federation [9] is the only health freedom organisation to have 'observer status' at Codex meetings. While the NHF has can potentially influence decisions in Codex meetings, as a non-governmental organisation, it has no voting rights.

UK Petition on Codex at No 10 Downing Street

Another misinformed, but undoubtedly well-meaning, action is the petition to the UK government on Codex at No 10 Downing Street, London. You can find this petition at: http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Vitamins/#detail [10].

This petition indicates that Codex will cause herbal/vitamin/mineral food supplements to become ‘prescription only’. This is not the case, as Codex Alimentarius deals with all categories of food and has already ratified (in 2005) the text of an international guideline on vitamin and mineral food supplements, which is expected to be finalised—complete with maximum guideline dosages—in around 2012 or 2013. By definition, products compliant with these guidelines will be safeguarded as a category of food (i.e., food supplements) and therefore will not be categorised as medicines.

Of course the petition is only open to British citizens (yet it’s being pushed as far afield as New Zealand) and the more urgent issue is the much more imminent restrictions in Europe being imposed by provisions of European Directives and Regulations that then have a major bearing on Codex.

The relationship between Codex and EU laws on natural health

In many ways, it is more correct to see Codex (with respect to its limited application to natural health issues) as the primary mechanism that allows restrictive European laws to be exported into Codex. From there it then forms an international guideline for the rest of the world. It's important then to appreciate that these guidelines cannot directly limit the availability of products—it's only when they are then implemented into national or regional laws that restrictions occur.

Codex member countries, of which there are over 170, are strongly encouraged to adopt Codex guidelines and standards, not just on natural health issues but across all other parts of the food chain, into their national or regional laws. And to understand more about the consequences of not implementing Codex guidelines and standards, please see both the ANH's Codex campaign [1] and its Say No to GM campaign [11]. Here you'll find examples of how the World Trade Organization [12] imposes trade sanctions, that have the capacity to cripple any country other than a super power.

Using your democratic right effectively

For people living in Europe, this is why there is little point in only making your concerns known to your national member of parliament (elected representative). The laws that will impact you are emerging from Brussels, so it is the European Commission, along with your own government (elected representatives and relevant government ministries) and, and then, very importantly, your Member of the European Parliament (MEP) that are so important to lobby.

Europeans who don’t already know who their MEP is, can find him or her at the following link: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/members.do [13].

Get involved in the ANH campaign

We would also urge you to look at the ANH Get Involved [14] page.

We realise that this is a difficult and complicated issue and we are very committed to trying to help people find their way through the maze. Please explore our website and think about what ways you can work with us to help ensure that our fundamental right to natural health is not just maintained during our lifetimes, but also for future generations.

Thank you.

The ANH Core Team.



Source URL: http://www.anhcampaign.org/news/codex-misinformation-creates-public-confusion
Links:
[1] http://www.anhcampaign.org/campaigns/codex
[2] http://www.codexalimentarius.net
[3] http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/THE_FOUNDATION/Events/codex-beware.htm
[4] http://www.anhcampaign.org/files/FSD_final-OJEC-2002.pdf
[5] http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EF
[6] http://www.irishhealthstores.com/
[7] http://www.anhcampaign.org/news/anh-press-release-ray-of-sunlight-from-anhirish-efforts-in-brussels
[8] http://www.codexalimentarius.net/download/report/644/al28_41e.pdf
[9] http://www.thenhf.com/
[10] http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Vitamins/#detail
[11] http://www.anhcampaign.org/campaigns/say-no-to-gm
[12] http://www.wto.org/
[13] http://www.europarl.europa.eu/members.do
[14] http://www.anhcampaign.org/get-involved

REMEMBERING NICK

MANY OF YOU FELT MOVED to write after reading my Christmas Day blog called NATIVITY AND TRAGEDY. Below is an open letter from the family of Nick Rauser, the fine and beloved youn man who died in a car crash a few days before the holiday. While I will be writing about Nick when I return, I thought it appropriate to share this lovely letter.

Nick would have been 16 today. Please remember this lovely family in your prayers, and tell your children you love them.


NICHOLAS CHARLES RAUSER
FEBRUARY 9, 1993

We would like to sincerely thank you for all of the love and support you have shown for Nick and us during this very difficult time. We truly cannot tell you how much this means to us.

We have heard many people describe Nick, saying he loved this, or loved that. When you think of Nick, please remember this. . .Nick loved. He showed so many people this with just a simple smile and a few kind words.

Nick made a profound impact on so many of our lives. His goal was simply to make everyone around him happy. Please help us honor the fine young man we all loved by lifting the people we encounter in our lives with kindness and gentle words.

Everyone deserves to be loved. Nick knew this and lived by it. Help us show Nicholas that he did make a difference.

Let Nick’s love live on.

Love,
Nick’s Family

PRAYER IN PASSING — THE GENERATION RX SOUNDTRACK

Any of you who have seen Generation RX know that Anoushka Shankar's work graces the soundtrack of the film. The daughter of the famed Ravi Shankar granted a license to my film GENERATION RX once we submitted my script and an explanation of why I felt her music was so critical to the film.

Here is a great interview with Ms. Shankar, beginning with "Prayer in Passing," the piece I use in the powerful conclusion of GENERATION RX.

EVELYN PRINGLE: SSRI PUSHERS UNDER FIRE

By Evelyn Pringle

Throughout the 1990's, most doctors who attended conferences, medical seminars and other events were not aware that the so-called "key opinion leaders" encouraging them to prescribe the new generation of antidepressants for everything under the sun, including to children as young as infants, were nothing more than highly paid drug pushers for Big Pharma.

For years, the research that showed SSRI antidepressants (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) were dangerous and practically useless was kept hidden, while the studies published and presented to potential prescribers painted a glowing picture of success. These days, a person would be hard pressed to find someone who does not have a family member or friend labeled mentally ill and taking drugs like Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, Lexapro and Celexa, or their chemical cousins Effexor, Cymbalta and Wellbutrin.

About once a year, a new round of headlines about all the money made by the SSRI pushers comes and goes; but nothing really ever seemed to stick, until now.

The Senate Finance Committee, with the ranking Republican, Senator Charles Grassley, leading the charge, is investigating GlaxoSmithKline regarding new revelations in a report filed in litigation showing that the company manipulated the numbers on adverse events related to suicidality in clinical trials back in 1989, to make it appear that Paxil did not increase the risk of patients experiencing suicidal behavior when, in fact, trial subjects on Paxil were eight times more likely to attempt or commit suicide than patients taking placebos.

Quite a few of the top pushers are also under investigation by the Committee due to revelations that millions of dollars has changed hands between the SSRI makers and the academics who signed off on some of the most fraudulently reported research in the history of modern medicine. A full list of names is easy to compile by scanning the literature on SSRI studies conducted on children. The same names appear repeatedly.

In alphabetical order, the Fortune 500 team of pushers, at a minimum, includes Drs Joseph Biederman, David Brent, Jeffrey Bridge, Daniel Casey, David Dunner, Graham Emslie, Daniel Geller, Robert Gibbons, Frederick Goodwin, Martin Keller, Andrew Leon, John Mann, John March, Charles Nemeroff, John Rush, Neal Ryan, David Shaffer, and Karen Wagner.

TRUTH BURIED IN LITIGATION GRAVEYARD

On February 6, 2007, the world famous historian on psycho-pharmacology, Dr David Healy, published a commentary entitled, "Why you should never trust new wonder drugs," in the UK's Daily Mail stating:

"Ten years ago, I sat faced with boxes and boxes that contained a dirty secret. Inside were thousands of confidential internal company documents about Prozac."

"The secret they revealed was that public statements about the safety of the drug were a lie; that the company knew Prozac was responsible for a raised risk of suicide and was only slightly more effective than a placebo."

Several years later, Dr Healy recounts, he was faced with the secrets of Paxil. "No one outside the two companies, and few within them," he writes, "knew what those boxes contained; I saw them because I was an expert witness in a court case."

"Documents prised out of companies by American court cases," he says, "have become the main way we have of discovering the truth about some of our best-selling drugs."

"The scientific literature, the very place doctors would look for a warning," he writes, "contained barely a hint of problems.”

"What's more, no one seems likely ever to have to answer for what appears to be fraud," he points out.

"In other organizations when evidence of disregard for public safety emerges, heads roll," Dr Healy said. "But there have been no resignations following these drug disasters - barely a flicker of embarrassment."

The UK's medicines “watchdog,” the British Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, he reports, "has never taken any action against the academics who make fraudulent claims in ghostwritten articles, nor doctors working for the companies who repeat such claims, even when they have been shown to be untrue."

"And no one in Britain," he points out, "has any means of finding out why their husband or child might have died."

Seven years before Dr Healy wrote this commentary, in a Prozac case for which he served as an expert witness, the plaintiff's legal team learned that Eli Lilly had withheld evidence in a jury trial when the May 7, 2007 Boston Globe reported that Lilly had agreed to pay $20 million for the rights to a patent on a new version of Prozac that would reduce "akathisia," the very side effect long believed to increase the risk of suicidal behavior, three months before the trial began.

While testifying under oath, Lilly researcher, Gary Tollefson, had told the jury, "there is absolutely no medically sound evidence of an association between any antidepressant medicine, including Prozac, and the induction of suicidal ideation or violence."

When in fact, the wording in the patent for the new formula stated "fluoxetine (Prozac) produces a state of inner restlessness (akathisia), which is one of its more significant side effects," and the "adverse effects which are decreased by administering the R(-) isomer of fluoxetine include but are not limited to headaches, nervousness, anxiety, insomnia, inner restlessness (akathisia), suicidal thoughts and self mutilation."

Patients who lived to talk about a failed suicide attempt have described the SSRI-induced akathisia, as being so unbearable that their only option for relief seemed to be death.

AMERICA'S MOST WANTED

Dr Daniel Casey was a major player in the SSRI drug-push and useful in many ways to the companies promoting the drugs. He was the chairman of the very first FDA advisory committee that met in 1991, to decide whether a warning about the increased risk of suicide should be added to the label of Prozac, the first SSRI approved in the US, and voted it down. He was also the chairman of the advisory panel that voted to approve Zoloft for Pfizer later that same year.

Bob Sorenson was a sales representative for Pfizer for 21 years. He moved to Oregon shortly before Zoloft was approved. During the first week at his new location, Pfizer’s chief of marketing at the time told him he needed to start calling on a doctor by the name of Dr Daniel Casey at the V.A. in Portland because he was very important to the company.

Dr Casey worked at the V.A., but never treated patients for depression, Mr Sorenson says. "His expertise [was] psychotropic drugs and experimentation."

The chief of marketing said he was interested in finding out what Dr Casey thought of the company's new drug, Zoloft. The company tried to call on him that day, but Dr Casey was not in. Mr Sorenson called on him later in the week and learned that Dr Casey was the lead investigator on Zoloft, which was up for approval by the FDA advisory committee Dr Casey chaired.

"He said I shouldn't be there, but I did ask how it looks for the drug and he said very well," Mr Sorenson recalls.

Dr Casey ended up making a ton of money from Zoloft. "He told me personally one time that he made enough from Pfizer in one year to purchase two cars," Mr Sorenson reports.

Dr Casey became a member of Pfizer's Advisory Board for Zoloft, which meant "all expense paid trips," including honorariums, to anywhere Pfizer wanted him to advise, at any location in the world, Mr Sorenson explains.

"Many speakers were sought out that would only give lectures that put Zoloft in a positive light," he notes, "there was no room for a balanced lecture."

"Dr Casey later became one of the most sought after speakers for the Pfizer promotion of Zoloft," he says, "the reps loved him because of his positioning of Zoloft."

Mr Sorenson was often told to take information to speakers, "including Dr Casey, to have them add the information to their lectures," he reports. "I look back at it now and see how wrong it was," he states.

"As far as the suicide issue," Mr Sorenson says, "the standard company line was that parents and doctors should be monitoring these kids because after being on Zoloft they finally feel good enough that they can carry out their suicide tendencies."

"Another tactic was to blame Paxil and Effexor," he recalls, "it was those drugs that caused suicidal tendencies, not Zoloft."

"Finally," he notes, "the statement was made that if they didn't take Zoloft, they probably would have committed suicide anyway."

Sales reps would practice and rehearse these statements at sales meetings to be able to respond to concerns or objections raised by Doctors about Zoloft’s relationship to suicidality, he says. "There would be contests as to who could detail the drug the best with objections," he recalls.

Pfizer was able to get rid of employees and still keep them quiet, he says, by offering severance packages of up to a year's salary, while forcing them to sign a confidentiality agreement, in which they promised not to sue, or speak adversely about Pfizer, as part of the deal.

Many people were so surprised at being terminated that they felt forced to sign because Pfizer kept the pressure on, he explains. They feared they wouldn’t find another job before financial problems set in, but regretted signing the agreement later, he says.

Mr Sorenson did not sign an agreement when he was fired. His young son had developed cancer, but Pfizer expected him to continue to attend out-of-town meetings and refused to believe that his son was terminally ill, he recalls. After 20 years with the company, Mr Sorenson was let go when he insisted that he needed to remain near his dying son and distraught wife. The Sorenson's son passed away on April 1, 2005.

GOING RATE FOR LEGAL DRUG PUSHERS

SEC filings for Cypress Bioscience provide a good source for estimating how much money legal drug pushers can make each year, from each company, because the names of several appear in these filings. According to its website, “Cypress Bioscience is committed to developing and commercializing pharmaceutical products and personalized medicine laboratory services that allow physicians to serve unmet medical needs.”

Drs Martin Keller and Charles Nemeroff, two of the most prolific depression-mongers, have served on the company’s board of directors, on its scientific advisory board and as consultants for this company. Under their 2004 Consulting Agreements, Cypress was required to pay them $50,000 per year for services rendered up to and including “two days per fiscal quarter.” In addition, the company could request additional services at a rate of $5,000 per day.

During 2003, Dr Nemeroff was paid $19,000 for additional services under his agreement, and Dr Keller was paid an extra $18,000. But they were only making $2,000 per day that year. As members of the Psychopharmacology Advisory Board, Dr Nemeroff earned $19,000 and Dr Keller $18,000 in 2003.

For their service as directors of the company in 2002, they each received $24,000. They were also offered stock options regularly. Cypress is only company. A bio on Dr Keller in a July 25, 2002 agenda for an annual meeting states that he is also a consultant to, "Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Forest Laboratories, Janssen, Merck, Inc, Organon, Otsuka Pharmacia/Upjohn, Pharmastar, Pfizer, Inc. and Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories."

It also shows he serves on the scientific advisory boards of, "Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cephalon, Cyberonics, Inc., Eli Lilly, Forest Laboratories, Merck, Inc, Mitsubishi, Organon, Pfizer, Sepracor, Scirex, SmithKline Beecham, Somerse, Vela Pharmaceuticals and Wyeth-Ayerst."

Dr David Dunner and a few more of the usual suspects appear in the Cypress SEC filings as advisory board members as well.

Dr Nemeroff's role in the prostitution of research is legendary. In April 2004, Shannon Brownlee, author of, "Overtreated," wrote an article in the Washington Monthly entitled, "Doctors Without Borders," after he was caught failing to disclose his financial ties to the companies whose treatments he promoted in a paper in Nature Neuroscience, and noted:

"With financial ties to nearly two dozen drug and biotech companies, Dr. Charles B. Nemeroff may hold some sort of record among academic clinicians for the most conflicts of interest.

"A psychiatrist, a prominent researcher, and chairman of the department of psychiatry and behavioral science at Emory University in Atlanta, Nemeroff receives funding for his academic research from Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Wyeth-Ayerst--indeed from virtually every pharmaceutical house that manufactures a drug to treat mental illness.

"He also serves as a consultant to drug and biotech companies, owns their stocks, and is a member of several speakers' bureaus, delivering talks--for a fee--to other physicians on behalf of the companies' products."

Dr Nemeroff stood to "reap as much as $1 million in stock" from just one company that manufactured one of the products in his Nature Neuroscience paper, she noted.

"But the drug industry's most powerful means of boosting the bottom line is funding research," Ms Brownlee writes, "which allows companies to control, or at least influence, a great deal of what gets published in the medical journals, effectively turning supposedly objective science into a marketing tool."

She notes how companies are able to routinely delay or prevent the publication of data and specifically how the majority of studies which found antidepressants to be no better than placebos, "never saw print in medical journals."

In conclusion, she states, "I'm struck more than anything by the apparent lack of shame among clinicians when it comes to this issue."

Two years later, on July 19, 2006, the Wall Street Journal reported that the journal, Neuropsychopharmacology, published by the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ACNP), planned to publish a correction of a favorable review of a new depression treatment device because it failed to list the ties of the eight academic authors to the device maker, Cyberonics, including lead author Dr Nemeroff, the editor of Neuropsychopharmacology at that time. The FDA had approved the VNS device in July 2005 over the objections of "more than 20" FDA scientists, Bloomberg reported a day earlier on July 18, 2006.

"This is about as classic an example as you'll ever find of conflict of interest and manipulation by thought leaders who are beholden to corporations," Dr Bernard Carroll, a member of the ACNP, told Bloomberg. "This article is a piece of a slick, skillfully coordinated PR campaign directed by the corporation," he said.

Ten days before the Wall Street Journal article, Cyberonics had sponsored a little noticed symposium on treatment-resistant depression at the annual Collegium Internationale Neuro-Psychopharmacologicum Meeting. The main presenters at the July 9, 2006 event were Drs Nemeroff, Dunner, and Keller (the lead author of the infamous Paxil “Study 329” on adolescents).

"In recent years, new treatment modalities have emerged, among them, the only FDA-approved treatment option specifically designed for this patient population, VNS Therapy," Dr Dunner stated in a press release for the event.

Dr Dunner was one of the authors vouching for the new device in the Neuropsychopharmacology paper. However, a “stamp of approval” from this guy should be taken with a grain of salt. Back in March 1995, he also vouched for Paxil as lead author of a study titled, "Reduction of suicidal thoughts with paroxetine in comparison with reference antidepressants and placebo," in the journal of European Neuropsychopharmacology. However, he later admitted that he never reviewed any of the actual data from that study.

Dr Nemeroff apparently learned nothing from the public embarrassment of the previous scandals. Last week, he was forced to step down as Chair of Emory’s psychiatry department. According to a December 23, 2008 posting by Ed Silverman, on the popular blog, Pharmalot:

"Under pressure from a US Senate Finance Committee investigation, renowned psychiatrist Charles Nemeroff is giving up the post he held for 17 years and must follow new restrictions on his outside activities, according to an Emory University statement.”

“Emory’s own investigation found Nemeroff received more than $800,000 from Glaxo, which paid Nemeroff more than any other drugmaker, but he never reported the fees. There were more than 250 speaking engagements between 2000 and 2006.”

"Moreover, Emory will not submit any National Institutes of Health grant or other sponsored grant or contract requests in which Nemeroff is listed as an investigator or has any other role for a period of at least two years,” Pharmalot reports.

All total, Dr Nemeroff earned more than $2.8 million from drug companies between 2000 and 2007, but failed to disclose at least $1.2 million to Emory, according to the Senator.

Dr Keller’s disclosure records are under investigation as well He also appears center stage in a new book by former Boston Globe reporter, Alison Bass, called, "Side Effects: A Prosecutor, a Whistleblower, and a Bestselling Antidepressant on Trial," The book contains a treasure trove of insider revelations with specifics on Dr Keller's endless conflicts of interest, along with other academics on the take. However, Ms Bass first broke the Keller story back on October 4, 1999, in the Globe, when she reported that he was forced to forfeit "hundreds of thousands of dollars" in state grant money in 1998.

She explained how in the same year that Dr Keller authored a review article in "Biological Psychiatry," and concluded that the newer antidepressants Zoloft, Bristol-Meyer’s Serzone, and Wyeth’s Effexor were more effective, he received $77,400 in personal income and $1.2 million in research funding from Bristol-Myers, as well as $8,785 in personal income from Wyeth.

In "Side Effects," she notes that Dr Keller did not report any income to the IRS from Glaxo for 1998, but says he did receive money from the Paxil maker, and also earned $62,500 from Celexa maker Forest Labs that year.

Dr Keller published 3 studies, "with colleagues," in the Journal of the American Medical Association and the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, touting the efficacy of Zoloft in 1998, and received $218,000 in personal income and more than $3 million in research funding from Pfizer the same year, Ms Bass reports.

The "colleagues," referred to include the all-time champion of child drugging, Dr Joseph Biederman, the main promoter of the bogus epidemic of childhood bipolar disorder. He too is under investigation for taking $1.6 million from drug companies between 2000 and 2007, and only disclosing a fraction of that amount to Harvard. On December 30, 2008, Harvard’s teaching hospital, Massachusetts General announced that Dr Biederman was no longer participating in several industry-funded trials and had agreed to “not to participate in any outside activities that are paid for or sponsored by industry, such as consulting activities or speaking engagements.”

In most of the SSRI trials conducted on children, "colleagues," will also include Dr Graham Emslie of Prozac fame, and the Zoloft Czar, Dr Karen Wagner, both from the University of Texas.

Back in April 2004, the British Medical Journal published a paper by a research team led by Dr Jon Jureidini, head of the department of psychological medicine at Women's and Children's Hospital in Australia, after a review of the clinical trial data on the safety and efficacy of antidepressant use with children. The review included the published trials, along with some unpublished data made public by the Committee on Safety of Medicines in the UK.

The Australian team was extremely critical of the published papers on the major trials of Prozac, Paxil and Zoloft, with Emslie, Wagner and Keller listed as lead authors. "In discussing their own data," the team wrote, "the authors of all of the four larger studies have exaggerated the benefits, downplayed the harms, or both."

"It is vital," they wrote, "that authors, reviewers, and editors ensure that published interpretations of data are more reasonable and balanced than is the case in the industry-dominated literature on childhood antidepressants."

Seven months later, the New York Times ran a report by Barry Meier on November 29, 2004, throwing another spotlight on the trail of corruption within the SSRI research factories, and zeroed in on Dr Wagner. He noted that, from 1998 to 2001, she was one of several researchers participating in more than a dozen industry-funded pediatric trials of antidepressants and other drugs, and that some of the results were published, but many were not.

In her Zoloft study, Dr Wagner acknowledged that she had received "research support" from several drug makers including Pfizer, which paid $80,000 to the center in connection with the test, Mr Meier reports. But she did not state that she received “sizable payments” from Pfizer for work related to the study, he says.

The same month that patients were first recruited for the Zoloft trial, in a financial filing with the school in December 1992, Dr Wagner reported that she received more than $10,000 from Pfizer, with no further details. A lawyer for the school told Meier that Dr Wagner said Pfizer had paid her $20,500 during the course of the Zoloft trial. But records for payments she received in speaking and consulting fees could not be located.

In September, Dr Wagner’s name was added to the Senator Grassley’s investigative roster, along with Dr John Rush. Between 2000 and 2005, Glaxo alone paid Dr Wagner $160,404, but only $600 was disclosed to the University, according to the Senator. She was also paid over $11,000 in 2002, by Eli Lilly, and that money was not disclosed either. Lilly paid Dr Rush $17,802 in 2001, but he only reported $3,000, Senator Grassley said.

Dr Emslie’s financial trail to the drug makers gained media attention last summer due to his prominent role in the “Texas Children's Medication Algorithm Project,” and the creation of a drug formularies for children. He was chairman of the panel that wrote guidelines instructing doctors to prescribe SSRIs off-label to kids for depression in 1998. On August 18, 2008, the Dallas Morning News ran the headline: “Conflict of interest fears halt children's mental health project.”

“A state mental health plan naming the preferred psychiatric drugs for children has been quietly put on hold over fears drug companies may have given researchers consulting contracts, speakers fees or other perks to help get their products on the list,” the News reported. University disclosure forms indicate that Dr Emslie “has made at least $130,000 in drug company speakers fees and consulting contracts since 2002,” the paper noted.

In discussing the investigation of Dr Wagner on the Senate floor, Dr Grassley pointed out that she was a co-author on Paxil Study 329. In 2001, when the study was published, Glaxo “reported paying her $18,255,” he said. “Study 329 was cited in a New York case where GlaxoSmithKline was charged with ‘repeated and persistent fraud,’” the Senator added.

Dr Emslie was also a co-author on the Paxil study and a check of the full list for 329, reveals that 5 of the co-authors appear with Dr Emslie on the guidelines for the “Children's Medication Algorithm Project,” including Karen Wagner, Boris Birmaher, Barbara Geller, Neil Ryan and Michael Strober. Dr Rush’s name is also on the Texas guidelines but he moved to Singapore last August.

********
Evelyn Pringle
epringle05@yahoo.com

(Written as part of the SSRI Litigation Round-Up, Sponsored by Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman’s Pharmaceutical Litigation Department www.baumhedlundlaw.com)

(Evelyn Pringle is a columnist for Scoop Independent News and an investigative journalist focused on exposing corruption in government and corporate America)

RFID: A PASSPORT TO 1984

IT'S ALMOST TIME FOR ME TO RENEW MY PASSPORT, which I have used quite frequently over the past decade. Things have changed since 1999, as you know, and all U.S. passports now come equipped with a RFID, or a Radio-frequency identification chip.

This does not make me happy — at all — nor does the prospect of being a player in one of Orwell's visions of 1984. According to Joris Evers of CNET, "RFID tags are being included in passports despite concerns about the holder's privacy and security . At worst, the chips could let terrorists identify bearers from a distance, which means they could be used as a trigger for explosives, experts have said.

The take-up of the electronic passports is bad news for privacy, said Bruce Schneier, chief technology officer of Counterpane Internet Security. "The risk in RFID passports is surreptitious access, and the security measures different countries are taking are varied in their scope and effectiveness," he said.

The soluytion? For protection, Schneier suggests that holders of an electronic passport should GUARD IT WELL (um, thanks for that wonderful advice). "If you're stuck with one of these passports, use a photocopy whenever you can and keep the real one wrapped in tin foil," he said.

Of course, the U.S. government has repeatedly dismissed the security and privacy concerns.

In the above video, Ethical hacker Chris Paget demonstrates a low-cost mobile device that surreptitiously reads and clones RFID tags embedded in United States passport cards and enhanced drivers' licenses.

As you'll see, it cost him less than $250 for the electronic gear capable of stealing your passport information.

Feel safer — or violated?

A HELPLESS MAN...IN AN ENDLESS NIGHT

WHILE I AM AWAY, DELVING DEEPLY INTO RESEARCH for next great documentary — to be announced later — I thought I'd share a few of "my favorite things" until my return. As you have read in past blogs, poetry is one of my secret loves.

Here's a lovely one from the famed Chinese poet Li Yu. Enjoy.

##


Love-sickness

Her hair: tied up with a ribbon

And fixed with a jade pin;

Her flowing robes,

soft and thin;

Between her adorned brows

a shallow furrow.


October: too much wind

Accompanied by rain

Beating on two or three

palm trees.

A helpless man

in an endless night.



#