RxISK was emailed about a post on SSRI Stories recently. Julie Wood runs SSRI stories, which features newspaper or related public domain material about suicides, homicides or other events linked to SSRI or other psychotropic drug intake.
The email read as follows:
Your using an article about my family members suicide as a propaganda piece and it is unacceptable, scummy, low life sh_t. Please do not make me come down to your level of dirtbaggery to fix this, and kindly delete the article and all references made to XY on any publication you have made. I really dont want to ask you this in person. Thank you for your cooperation.
The event in question had been reported 12 years previously. Julie opted to take the newspaper report down. Not because the level of hostility was so palpable but because she almost always does. But what’s going on?
In 2015 the trial took place of James Holmes, a fairly meek and mild guy, who had shot and killed twelve people and injured seventy others at the premiere of Dark Knight Rises in Aurora Colorado.
He had been put on Zoloft by a university psychiatrist when he sought treatment for being shy. He steadily became more disinhibited and aggressive on this while the dose was being increased . Thoughts of doing something like what he did began to take root in him. He tried to warn his psychiatrist and others but was ignored.
See The Man Who Thought he was a Monster: Antidepressants and Violence
After the killings, Arlene Holmes, James’ mother, figuring his illness – schizophrenia – caused him to do it, began to advocate for the early detection and treatment of people with this illness. She wrote a wonderful book, When the Focus Shifts, that would persuade many readers to support her efforts to support early detection and treatment of mental illness.
The problem was/is that James Holmes didn’t have a shred of schizophrenia. Having interviewed him, my view is that his Zoloft most likely made him do it. His lawyers, however, were too scared to raise this or else did a deal with the prosecution that would spare him the death sentence. This left them with a difficult task to save his life (if there was no deal) – convincing a jury he had an illness he pretty evidently didn’t have.
But Arlene rather than her son is the focus here. After a homicide or suicide, it’s natural for many people to figure that life would be a lot better if we detected and treated illnesses like schizophrenia or depression earlier.
The dynamics involved here are laid out wonderfully by Paul John Scott in Malcharist – one of whose central characters loses her husband to suicide and finds herself sucked into the kind of operation the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP) operate.
Nine years ago, Julie attended an AFSP Out of the Dark event on International Suicide Survivors Day and had a surprise which she outlined in How Pharma Captures Bereaved Mothers.
Checking back on AFSP’s financials last week she found that in 2012 the net assets of this charity/ non-profit were $3.7 million. By the end of 2019 this top-rated Charity had $31.8 million – figures that few if any non-profits ever have.
We have covered some small-time scams before that can wreck some people’s lives – See RxISK and Sharks, Bio Rip-off, BioDelusions, Bio Hack but if viewed as a scam this is in an entirely different league.
In 2012 AFSP had downtown Manhattan offices with some of their members wondering how this got paid for. Their generous pharma support is not immediately apparent. Goodness only knows what $32 million or more now supports.
AFSP’s focus on children and mothers – see image above and Julie below -is chilling. Their aim appears to be to get people on antidepressants – but 30 out of 30 RCTs of antidepressants in children have been negative including all the trials published as positive, which AFSP will know because some of their expert consultants/board members have had negative trials published as positive.
Malcharist beautifully captures the spirit of AFSP meetings which Julie’s account from 2012 lays out below. This includes irate people branding as propaganda any effort to mention that drugs can cause problems – as in the email we received last week.
Last week I heard about International Survivors of Suicide Day, Nov 17, from a friend who believes that I need to work on moving forward since the death by suicide of my wonderful son John David. Karyn had heard that a group of volunteers was holding several county-sponsored sessions just north of the city.
I am a believer in peer support so I decided it would be valuable to go. Only people who have experienced this kind of loss first hand can really understand it. I thought I was going to talk to a group of survivors, perhaps to hear stories and advice from other survivors and experts, to compare experiences and share thoughts about coping.
There was some of that, but I quickly discovered that there was another agenda at play. We were welcomed to the session by two lovely, kind, sincere people.
The session started with a video. About 5 minutes into it, I texted my husband to ask if the maker of the video, the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP), was funded by a drug company. He checked and texted me back that yes, it was. I asked because the strong messaging in the video was that people commit suicide because they have undiagnosed mental disorders and that the way to prevent suicide is to get people in for treatment (translation: people who have troubles need diagnoses and drugs). At the same time, in a couple of the portrayed situations, drugs probably exacerbated the problems and contributed to the suicides. The video is so clearly guilty of lying by omission that I was alarmed.
After we watched the video one of the group leaders told us that AFSP is a non-profit that has offices in downtown Manhattan. He joked that he does not know how they afford the rent there. He told us that they hold “Out of the Dark” walks all over the country to raise funds, and one large overnight annual walk.
After the video we formed a circle so people could talk. There were 20 of us. The first people to speak said a few words about the person they lost and started to cry. When there was a pause I told people that my son died because of a stimulant drug, and how upset I had been to discover this. I pointed out that it was very misleading to show a video about suicide and never mention that the drugs the people in the video were taking can cause suicide. I pointed out that Forest Labs funded the video (this was also in the credits so I never needed to text Peter) and I pointed out how AFSP affords their rent.
Then, the first woman who had spoken, said that she suspected that drugs caused the death of her husband of 50 years. He was given Cipralex, and he told one of his daughters on the phone that “he was feeling odd, not himself”. He apparently also told his doctor, who then doubled the dose and added Seroquel. Two days later, after playing a game of cards with him, his wife went out on a short errand and when she got back she found he had hanged himself.
One of the group leaders then said that some people react badly to drugs but that an antidepressant had saved his life after his 18-yr-old son committed suicide a year ago. Then five people in the group said that they managed to “go on” after their loved ones’ suicides only with the help of antidepressants. The other facilitator explained that sometimes brain chemicals go off kilter and we need drugs to get them back in line. I said I have heard that it is true that antidepressants can be very beneficial to some people in the short term, but there is no evidence that any drug fixes brain chemicals.
After that a man who was there with his wife stormed out of the room saying that he came to the session for support, not to hear this kind of @#$&*. He was clearly upset that I had raised the issue of drugs and their contribution to suicide. After he left his wife explained to the group that their 31-yr-old son who had been feeling suicidal went to the local hospital where they gave him pills, held him for a while and then sent him home where he shot himself.
Then the woman beside me on my left said that she used to be a great mom until she started taking SSRIs 8 years ago. She was crying and told us all that she had attempted suicide on Prozac several times because she “felt crazy”. Then she tried Paxil which did not work and she got worse and now she has been taking Effexor for 4 years and it does not help either. She also said that she had some real issues in her life that had been building up but nobody would listen to her. When she went to see doctors they would only give her drugs, and all they wanted to hear about was if the drugs made her feel better. Nobody would listen to her, she says, not her friends, not her daughters and not her doctors. She said she believes that once upon a time people had to listen, and to be there for each other but “now we expect people to take a pill and snap out of it”.
Then another fellow said that in the case of his 23-yr old daughter he complained to her doctor that the drugs had changed her, and she was behaving differently and he was worried about what they were doing to her. Shortly after this she killed herself.
Then another woman in the group, said that her nephew had killed himself 3 weeks after starting an antidepressant and nobody could have foreseen this because it was just not like him. The woman sitting beside me on my right (in her 70’s I would guess) told us that her sister died the same way a year ago. Her other sister was also in the room.
The video had much in it that is helpful and appealing. For example, in it a man named David Becker talks about how bereaved family members feel that the suicide death places a heavy yoke around our necks. The yoke never goes away and it never gets lighter, but we get stronger and better able to carry it. That is a comforting idea. The video also encourages support groups and these are certainly a good thing.
Less appealing was the case of John Fujikawa, whose wife Nancy was diagnosed with depression and given medication. When she stopped taking the drug two years later she committed suicide. There was no mention that suicidality can be a side effect of antidepressant withdrawal. The message conveyed was that Nancy stopped taking the meds that she needed because she had an illness, and without them, she died.
The omission in the video of any mention that drugs could have been a factor in at least 3 of the deaths portrayed created a very distorted message. People who see the video will focus on the topics and ideas raised in the video, and it appears that this is what is intended. All the people in the video talked about their guilt, and how they did not notice warning signs, and what they could have done differently. The omission of any mention of the contribution of drugs is especially damaging because drug-induced suicide tends to be sudden and unpredictable and there are no warning signs. To fail to tell this to grieving relatives leaves them with a misplaced belief in their own responsibility and guilt.
People in the video promote only the idea that people who feel suicidal are sick and need to be taken for treatment. Suicide is a very complex phenomenon. There is no mention of the most important protective factors against suicide, like close relationships, confidence, social integration, and a sense of pride, and being loved. There is no mention of known risk factors like major trauma, a feeling of not belonging or not being accepted, sexual orientation, etc. The exclusion of any discussion of these factors is as serious a distortion as failing to mention the role of drugs in many suicides.
I came home from the event and wrote a note to the organizers that described my experience and concluded with the following:
“I am glad I came to today’s session. I am impressed at the dedication of the terrific people who are contributing their time and energy to helping and supporting surviving victims of suicide but I am pretty sure that if I had not been there drugs would not have been mentioned. My strong recommendation to you is that if the County wants to use drug-company sponsored videos that mislead by failing to mention the role of drugs in many suicides, that you ensure that your group leaders are well enough informed that they raise this crucial issue for discussion along with other important contributing factors. If they fail to do this, many people at your suicide bereavement sessions may be deprived of the chance to understand the truth behind their tragedies.”
Then I went to the AFSP website. It provides information about psychiatric diagnoses that they imply are the main cause of suicide, but the same sin of omission in the video is reflected there.
I discovered that the “Out of the Dark” walks including the annual Out of the Dark Overnight 18 mile walk raise money for research and awards. In 2011, $7 million was raised from these walks. AFSP also encourages donations, memorial tributes and other forms of charitable giving.
Founded with drug company money, the AFSP now sustains itself mostly through public generosity.
In their year fiscal year ended 2011, they also got donations of $1.3 million, fundraising revenue of $116K (net), investment revenue of $304K, and “other revenue” of $439K. The same year, the AFSP collected $9.5 million, mostly from well-meaning people and families damaged by suicide, to support a suicide prevention strategy that may actually cause more suicides than it prevents.
The annual report provides a long list of research grant recipients which the report summarizes as follows:
“AFSP research grants support the work of investigators from all disciplines that contribute to our understanding of suicide and suicide prevention. Since 2000, AFSP has given grant support totaling over $10 million to scientists throughout the country and abroad for studies on neurobiological, genetic, epidemiological, clinical, psychological and sociological aspects of suicide.”
A quick scan of the list of grants given reveals that the research is mostly about looking for biological connections between mental illnesses and suicide. Thus, many of the people who give to support the AFSP are paying to support the drug company agenda that led to the death of their loved ones. They have the right to know this.
The AFSP is expanding. They have chapters in Israel and Ireland, and claim they will be in 20 more locations shortly. The 2012 flyer I received suggests that they are in Ghana and Japan. They are also in Canada.
I have complained to the Better Business Bureau of New York, Charities division, that AFSP is in violation of the BBB standards with respect to conflict of interest rules and of false advertising (by omission). I have since discovered that they are actually incorporated in Delaware so I will complain there, too.
Illustration: Sympathy and Pills, 2012 © Billiam James
After Krohn-McGill had boosted the link, Jeremy’s takeout on Griffin had been shared 465,000 times and that precipitated the unsigned emails telling him YOU SHOULD THINK TWICE ABOUT THE HARMS YOU HAVE DONE ITS HERTFUL TO SAY GARBAGE THINGS ABOUT ANTIDEPRESSANTS.
How Pharma Captures Bereaved Mothers
November 26, 2012 | 9 Comments
Introduction by David Healy
In 1987 Herb Hendin started the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP). AFSP is a non-profit 501(c)(3). It is an active fund-raiser.
AFSP fell into the hands of Charlie Nemeroff and later John Mann and colleagues at Columbia. On December 1st 2000, Charlie Nemeroff told the Council of AFSP that Healy had been sacked from his job in Toronto. This was before I was told I was being let go, and before the University knew anything about it. Nemeroff had given a lecture the previous day at a meeting in Toronto that I had also lectured at.
When telling me months before that I might get sacked he had previously intimated that he was going to be the expert witness for GSK in the Tobin trial – where Tim Tobin took an action against GSK after his father-in-law took Paxil and 48 hours later killed his wife, daughter, and grand-daughter before killing himself. John Mann ended up as the GSK expert in the case. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Tim Tobin. We now know Dr Nemeroff was in receipt of funds to the tune of $1 million from GSK during this period.
This post by Steindór Erlingsson asks awkward questions –
Shortly after reading Medication Madness I became conscious that difficult subjects would ever be discussed openly. It was David Healy’s book Let Them Eat Prozac (2004) that made me realize this:
No matter how many physicians or others reported to SmithKline suicides or homicides they thought related to [Paxil/Seroxat], SmithKline would deny any evidence for causation while there was no randomized controlled trial evidence. The fact that they had never undertaken any trials and had no plans to do so smacked of washing their hands in the face of crucifixion (p. 222).
But when such groups are established by those steeped in the psychiatric-pharmaceutical industry, the motives become questionable. Members and supporters may not be aware of these motives. They may believe that pharmaceutical companies are being benevolent in donating funds for research. But many of these companies have been sued and investigated for covering up adverse effects of their products and unscrupulous marketing.
Stop Suicide By Helping Big Pharma, Says Shady Suicide Prevention Group
BY MARTHA ROSENBERG
Both NAMI and Active Minds swoop down on campuses after suicides to suggest that not enough antidepressants are being prescribed–despite the clear dangers posed for that age group and sometimes without knowing if the victim was already on the pushed drugs. To remove the fabricated stigma to mental problems, Pharma funded groups visit public schools to suggest more young people should be on drugs. They even produce posters with the message that mental illness is “cool.” Their efforts may not help the young people but they sure help Pharma.
Drug company-funded anti-suicide groups on campus raises questions
Are drug companies really trying to prevent suicide or–a loss in their own profits?
Revisiting the whole experience, it is disheartening to see that far from progressing, our understanding has retreated, if anything. What has changed since that time? “The system” continues to steer family members away from recognizing and acknowledging the role of medication in tragedies that befall their loved ones. Even when one person “gets it”, they often keep quiet out of deference to a husband/wife/parent/other relative who wants to believe that the problem was inherent mental illness. The other thing that has changed is that news outlets no longer mention medication when there is a mass shooting or stabbing or running down random innocent people with a vehicle. Perhaps this is to repect personal privacy, or perhaps so many people are on antidepressants now that it genuinely seems unremarkable/ irrelevant to journalists. The number of mass killings – including annihilated families – continues to grow while officialdom debates the role of gun control, mental illness and online games.
Isn’t it amazing how often we see the same names appearing as ‘linked’ to a whole variety of causes? Unfortunately, it never seems to be that a ’cause’ is improved by their presence – in fact, quite often the opposite is true!
I admire the way that you brought the subject of prescribed drugs’ role in many suicide cases to the notice of your fellow ‘supported parents’ at the meeting Julie – it was certainly a serious omission that this wasn’t already mentioned. I bet that the names at the top of the charity tree were not quite as pleased as we are though.
Family members are treated as fools by many professionals in the world of mental health too. Over many years I kept bringing up the fact that maybe reducing a dose of medication, rather than increasing in every crisis, would better help our son to recover. This suggestion fell on deaf ears at best – and in disgusted looks suggesting my lack of any possible knowledge in such a “professional” area at worst.
Unfortunately for the said “professionals”, I do not give up easily! I made enquiries about our son’s medications and the doses and found from an “expert” that I was in fact correct in my assumption all along – that the doses were NOT “very low” ( which I had been told) and that reductions could well be an answer to the problem. The “expert” later declared that neither of the medications was in fact needed by the patient as he does not have a mental illness – in fact, the medications were partly to blame for the patient’s problems! Around eighteen months ago, when leaving the area, the “expert”, in a final progress report to our son’s GP, went as far as to say that in his opinion “most of the problems that Shane has had have been caused by us in the mental health service”. Truth , told without a care for possible consequences to himself, and an ability to believe the patient are two traits so sadly missing in very many areas of our lives today.
Our peer support group, here in North Wales, are calling on all who would like a chance to speak to that ‘expert’ about medication withdrawal to join us in a zoom meeting on Wednesday, July 28th. at 6.30pm GMT. This is open to ALL WHO NEED SUPPORT, or want to clarify matters concerning those that they care for, wherever they are. Normally, we encourage only those within travelling distance of our group to join us but this is an OPEN MEETING held by ZOOM for two reasons :- Covid restrictions have cancelled in-person meetings and the “expert” would now have far further to travel than just along the North Wales coast as was the case in our previous Open Meetings! If you are interested in joining us please email
firstname.lastname@example.org for further details.
Thank you kindly, Julie for highlighting a subject matter which is still considered taboo by many people, Doctors, Governments and Big Pharma.
I am so sorry we all had to learn the hard way!
Educating a culture which is indeed, in need of desperate change, is not only challenging but at the best of times, can be quite demoralizing.
I am of the opinion, that if one does not have all the genuine information within ones reach, one cannot make an informed/balanced decision.
Some Doctors, epidemiologists, Governments, Scientists, nurses and many people in the ‘know how’, do not have all the information pertaining to a particular medicine.
Anyone, can indoctrinate you to believe that:
1. It is the right medicine to take (Persuasive marketing by: Big Pharma, Governments, some Doctors, families and friends).
2. We are being misinformed by many uneducated people who know nothing about this subject matter.
I can appreciate that we are being misinformed by flawed information that is indeed, misleading. If one does not cover all bases, it would be like jumping out of a plane without a parachute.
I am impressed with so many people who are beginning to wake up and question things and not just take everything they read/hear as gospel.
Many people do not want to take a ‘leap of faith’ into the unknown. It is like playing ‘Russian roulette’ with you good health and life.
Lack of Information = misinformation
The problem we are facing today is the following:
1. If we do not follow what most of the people believe or are programmed to believe as the truth , we are then perceived as illogical, rebellious or uneducated. We will be judged harshly because we have a different perspective of seeing things!
I wish I had some of the knowledge I had now, back then, when my life was in a pickle. It would of saved me a lot of harm and suffering.
2. They say that sharing = caring. Imparting that information is a joy for me and I am passionate about what I do. I do not see it as a chore. I am sure Julie and other concerned individuals do what they do for the very same reasons. It is a labour of love that is hardly rewarded. – We take all the punches! Even if our mental integrity is defamed.
So we have a ‘catch-22’ situation where if we do not agree with the majority, we are being discriminated against because we do not share the same opinion/ view.
I simply reinforce and highlight that if I do not have all the information to make an informed decision, I cannot give anyone my consent or blessing.
I need to question/analyse things from all angles and if I find out I have been ‘hoodwinked’ and this comes to the surface especially, at a later stage, it may be a matter of ‘to little- too late’ and there can be disheartening/dire, consequences to face.
The lack of reasoning, compassion and insight, on behalf of those companies who only have a invested interest in their product, is not only misleading but downright derogatory.
If it benefits some people and harms others, we cannot afford to declare that all medicines/treatments are beneficial (narrow sided view), nor should we label those who can see beyond the smoke and mirrors, as ‘CRAZY!’ ~ This is an immature and short sighted way of thinking.
We have to weigh up pros/cons of any debate, in order to get some appreciation and understanding of any subject matter. Sadly, sometimes experience is also, overlooked.
We cannot just ‘cherry pick’ what suits us at the time. We have to stay grounded with all the facts and say it the way it is!
Like Julie mentioned:
Much of the information that people read/hear, have been modified and tailored to convince many that the product they are trying to sell, is beneficial.
All the truth and facts are deleted from these persuasive videos, smooth talks (silver tongues ) and glossy brochures that advocate medicines for mental health, as being beneficial. ~ It is just a biased view.
With all honesty, do you think a product would sell if it mentions any of the negative outcomes?
We need to also have information in these videos, honest discussions by clinicians and Big Pharma mentioning :
1. Medication withdrawals. How it impacts individuals.
2. How it alters the ‘hard wire’ of the brain. If it impacts many people where they are are put into a ‘grid lock’ to commit suicide, without any warning – this needs to bought to people’s attention, also.
3.Upping a dose of medication or prescribing other meds with antidepressants, may be very deleterious to one’s brain and if not careful it could do more harm than good.
4.Withdrawing from a antidepressant, ‘cold turkey’ could exacerbate or amplify ones mental health condition and lead them on a downward spiral.
Do we ever mention how these antidepressants interact with many other prescribed medicines or vaccines? It could be an immediate health crisis or it may take time for an unusual behaviour(s) or other mental/health issues to evolve.
It takes people like Julie, to uncover many dubious aspects of medicines that are hidden from the general public.
It is not all roses and violets, when a drug promises benefits and undesirable side effects are hidden.
If the patient was informed about all the risks, I am sure they would research safer alternatives.
I have one thing to say to Julie and all other brave souls.
Keep doing what you are passionate about and don’t be afraid to speak the truth, even if you voice trembles at times.
Sadly, the biggest disease we have on our hands, is an epidemic of misleading and flawed information.
It is our health, our body and our choice and if something does not seem right, avoid it all costs!
Why do some have to hide behind a mask to get the TRUTH out there?
You have just documented a whole list of things which any health worker should read. For myself I would rspect someone who is honest about what they don’t know as part of the process of (necessarily partially) informed consent . I would trust that someone more than one who bluffs or plays on ignorance or tries to influence based on simply a nice personality or even good relationship Frankly we both but mainly I take responsibility then for the decision.
Ask an Expert: Suicide
What distinguishes impulsive from non-impulsive suicides?
David Healy claims that Prozac, the bestselling drug of all time, can drive people to suicide – even if they aren’t depressed. The company that makes the drug (and earns £1.8bn a year from it) says that’s rubbish. So have his views just cost him a job? Sarah Boseley investigates
It has hit a nerve that is already raw. Last year an international furore broke out over Nancy Olivieri, the Toronto-based scientist who broke a confidentiality agreement with the pharmaceutical company Apotex and published research concerning the level of toxicity of its drug Deferiprone for children suffering from thalassaemia. The Hospital for Sick Children, part of Toronto University, at one point tried to sack her. James Turk, executive director of the Association, draws a parallel with the treatment of Healy. “This is every bit as serious as the Olivieri case – and that’s a very serious one,” he says. “We can’t see how this can be other than a serious erosion of academic freedom.”
Dr. Nancy Olivieri @DrNancyOliv 57m·
THE poster study for #ResearchMisconduct & academic coverup. In my
@UofT#Health & #Pharma class, we discuss its crimes (and its ongoing consequences for patients) nearly every week.
TY @MaryanneDemasi H/t @thackerpd
And not just #Pharma crime:
Maryanne Demasi, PhD @MaryanneDemasi 3h
The limitation of peer-review – Researchers claimed, in a peer-reviewed journal, that paroxetine (Paxil) SSRI was safe & effective in children. But an analysis of company documents obtained via litigation later found the drug was ineffective & harmful.
Fiona French, honesty and integrity are my values Retweeted
Miranda Levy @mirandalevycopy
Has your child (u 18) been put on antidepressants in the pandemic? I’m looking to interview UK parents ANONYMOUSLY, pls, for a sensitive national broadsheet piece. I’m at email@example.com. Friends, pls retweet. @recover2renew@CEP_UK@JDaviesPhD@AntiDepAware @Altostrata
Great, thanks! I have lots of literature, and am interviewing
– but I do need to hear from some parents themselves..
“These children have got things going on in their lives that they need help with, but they don’t have medical disorders that need medicating…
I can understand somebody wanting to have their details deleted and to be frank expressing crude anger is pretty common – but the AFSP has huge numbers of volunteers working for them as well so no surprise if they’re tracking SSRIs /Rxisk like this
I kept wondering why the Kennedy family is so involved with health as well as politics even before seeing the letter. They could get involved with any issue with their name and fame .
AUGUST 23, 2017 Stop Suicide By Helping Big Pharma, Says Shady Suicide Prevention Group
BY MARTHA ROSENBERG Snippett
Next month, hundreds across the country will participate in “Out of the Darkness” walks to raise awareness about suicide and to support the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP).
… the groups are funded by Pharma to increase drug use and are widely considered unethical front groups, also called astroturf.
The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, founded in 1987, is steeped in Pharma money. In 2008, AFSP merged with the Suicide Prevention Action Network USA or SPAN which had announced in 2004 that “SPAN USA’s efforts to develop and expand its suicide survivor network received a major boost with a recent grant from Eli Lilly and Company Foundation,”……
Maybe the Kennedys collectively regret about the way relatives have suffered including …https://www.irishcentral.com › Roots › History
Rose and Joe Kennedy, the parents of President John F. Kennedy, tried to erase all detail about their handicapped daughter Rosemary. … She was forcibly and secretly lobotomised
Robert Kennedy was addicted to rescription drugs and now is involved with The Defender – a campaigning organisation based in USA
About The Defender
The Defender is Children’s Health Defense’s news and views website. It features content aligned with the organization’s mission to end childhood health epidemics. It is not pro pharma Robert Francis Kennedy Jr. (born January 17, 1954) had done loads of really decent other work
Patrick J. Kennedy 2016 (
Member of the U.S. House of Representatives
from Rhode Island’s 1st district
January 3, 1995 – January 3, 2011
610-743-0544 | firstname.lastname@example.org
The following links are listed to provide you with additional online mental health care information.
Amongst many others –
American Psychiatric Association
American Foundation for Suicide Prevention
NEW YORK STATE SENATOR
Senator Tim Kennedy Joins Crisis Services to Announce More Than $500,000 in State Funding for Critical Mental Health Resources
TIMOTHY M. KENNEDY June 29, 2021 ISSUE: MENTAL HEALTHACCESS TO MENTAL HEALTH SERVICESSUICIDE PREVENTION; COVID-19; MENTAL HEALTH
It’s a formidable network for sure with their contacts and influence – but good to see at least they are being ‘watched ‘ and challenged themselves
Why do good people have to pay a price for speaking the truth?
There are so many people who are honest that have lost their career, their good reputations have been defamed and have been poorly misrepresented/treated!
It speaks volumes about some of the professionals in their chosen fields!
The honest people are being treated worse than criminals. What a disgrace!
The NAMES, the FACTS, the FIGURES…
Suicide Prevention Drug Pushing Racket – Part II
Posted on August 22, 2009 by sakerfa
A co-author on the Gibbons study was Dr John Mann, a former president of the AFSP, and a professor of psychiatry at Columbia University.
Columbia University’s 2007 Annual Report shows donations of between $100,000 and $499,000 from the AFSP, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer Incorporated and Pfizer International. The Pfizer Foundation gave $1 million or more.
The report also shows gifts of between $50,000 to $99,999 from Wyeth, the GlaxoSmithKline Foundation, Eli Lilly and Company, and the Eli Lilly Foundation.
Mann has served as a paid expert witness for antidepressant makers Pfizer and Glaxo. He testified in the only Paxil suicide-homicide case ever to make it to a jury.
During his testimony, Houston attorney, Andy Vickery, brought out the fact that Mann had received more than $30 million in research funding from drug companies over the previous decade.
Mann admitted during cross-examination that he had written in three articles that there was possibly a small, subpopulation of patients vulnerable to suicide or violence under the drug, Vickery told Lawyers Weekly.
On June 6, 2001, the jury ruled against the drug maker and found that Paxil “can cause some people to become homicidal and/or suicidal,” and awarded the plaintiffs over $6 million.
In nearly all the studies and papers published over the years that claim SSRIs work with children and do not cause suicide, the same academic quacks appear as investigators and co-authors. The list of names includes, but is not limited to, Joseph Biederman, David Brent, Jeffrey Bridge, David Dunner, Graham Emslie, Daniel Geller, Robert Gibbons, Frederick Goodwin, Martin Keller, Andrew Leon, Anne Libby, John Mann, John March, Charles Nemeroff, John Rush, Neal Ryan, David Shaffer, Karen Wagner and Robert Valuck.
Many of the same names also appear on the ever-growing list of so-called “Key Opinion Leaders,” who have been exposed in an investigation by the US Senate Finance Committee, under the leadership of Senator Charles Grassley, as not disclosing Big Pharma money, which thus far includes, Harvard’s Biederman, Thomas Spencer and Timothy Wilens; Nemeroff and Zachary Stowe from Emory; Melissa DelBello at the University of Cincinnati; Stanford University’s Alan Schatzberg, president of the American Psychiatric Association; Keller at Brown University; Wagner and Rush from the University of Texas; and Goodwin, the former host of a radio show called “Infinite Minds.”
Graham Emslie’s earnings from antidepressant makers were highlighted in the media last year due to his role in the “Texas Children’s Medication Algorithm Project.” Emslie was chairman of the panel that issued guidelines in 1998, instructing doctors to prescribe SSRIs off-label to children for depression.
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.
Emslie “has made at least $130,000 in drug company speakers fees and consulting contracts since 2002,” the paper noted, citing University disclosure forms. Co-authors on guidelines of the “Texas Children’s Medication Algorithm Project,” include Karen Wagner, John Rush and Neil Ryan.
The SEC filings for Cypress Bioscience provide a good source for estimating the amount of money these “KOLs” are pulling in per year, from each separate company.
Keller and Nemeroff have served on the board of directors, the scientific advisory board, and as consultants for Cypress. Under their 2004 consulting agreements, the firm was required to pay $50,000 per year for services rendered up to and including “two days per fiscal quarter.” In addition, Cypress could request additional services at a rate of $5,000 per day.
Nemeroff was paid $19,000 for additional services in 2003, and Keller made an extra $18,000. For serving on the scientific advisory board, Nemeroff was paid $19,000 and Keller earned $18,000, in 2003. As members of the board of directors in 2002, they each received $24,000.
A July 25, 2002, bio for Keller in the agenda for a Cypress annual meeting, shows he was 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.”
The bio also reports that Keller served 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.”
Suicide Victims on Antidepressants
The cold and inhuman world of psychiatry is coming even closer .Imagined comment -‘Relational psychiatry – what’s that ? Who wants a relationship with them…’
The British Journal of Psychiatry
Call for Papers: Precision Medicine and Personalised Healthcare in Psychiatry
Submission Due Date: 1st August 2021
The past few years has seen a rapid increase in the use of data science in psychiatry research across the lifespan- including the use of data driven and model based approaches for diagnostic, prognostic, and treatment response predictions. Data science is also being used to identify new illness subgroups using questionnaire data, biomarker or brain imaging data, or combinations therein, that transcend traditional diagnostic groups for potential use in the development for new targeted treatments. Statistical models have been developed across data types to highlight the possibility of machine learning used throughout the care pathway, from app-based community interventions, electronic health records for patient allocation and through to genetic and brain imaging in secondary and tertiary care.
These approaches are coming closer and closer to real world translation and clinical implementation, however significant challenges will be raised. These include the standards of statistical models, replicability and reproducibility in real world settings and the infrastructure for practical implementation. There are also clear issues raised when potentially giving model based prognoses in psychiatry, the right ‘not to know’, when to use data science and how such models may impact resource usage.
We would welcome papers across the lifespan from the arena of youth mental health to dementia, and across multiple data modalities including symptoms, neuroimaging, proteomics and genomics: with the emphasis on papers close to the challenge of real-world implementation and clinician interaction.
You cannot put a price on a ;life.
Peoples lives are more important than profits!
“Our world-class medical staff have the skills and training to ensure they can diagnose accurately and decide on the best treatment plans.”
Catch-it on camera…
Hold the camera, right here…
As far as we know, our review is the first of the risk of suicide and violence in healthy volunteers. It was inspired by David Healy’s work.7 In 2000, Healy published a study he had carried out with 20 healthy volunteers – all with no history of depression or other mental illness – and to his big surprise, two of them became suicidal when they received sertraline.25 One was on her way out the door to kill herself in front of a train or a car when a phone call saved her. Both volunteers remained disturbed several months later and seriously questioned the stability of their personalities.
“A toxicology report found only ‘therapeutic’ levels of Sertraline and Tramadol in his system at the time, which ‘would not have interfered with his thinking’ in the moments before his death.”
RAF high-flyer took his own life at the age of 26 – now his family want to help other people talk about mental health
“Together, they are setting up a charity to honour ‘Paul’s legacy’, and have established a Facebook group to encourage people to ‘share stories’ of their mental health struggles in the hope that people will be able to learn and help each other.”
Unbeknownst to parents because of Universal Denial emanating from the Top-Down, Doctors, Coroners, Politicians, the parents are on a wild-goose-chase. –
She had always assumed the note meant Mark was having battles with his sanity. Now it seemed different. Now it seemed like proof of deep confusion. It also seemed angry. That made Susie start to feel angry herself.
“Our drugs are created, tested and promoted from within caves of secrecy, and this secrecy stole my husband’s life.” Malcharist
In to the Lightness, on the other hand, is a slogan ‘that walks’ but has yet to – Catch-On…
I was fully aware my teenage daughter’s death was precipitated by Zoloft-induced akathisia and egregious medical errors. However, when her bewildered, grieving friends asked if they could “do something” to honor Natalie, I wanted to, somehow, help them navigate their grief. I explained to them that Natalie’s death was iatrogenic and not a “traditional” suicide a depressed person might suffer. Natalie’s friends decided to participate in an AFSP “Out of the Darkness” walk (fundraiser). At the time, I knew little about AFSP’s shady pharma-funded operation and pharma promotion goals. While I knew AFSP’s walk wasn’t focused on preventing akathisia-induced deaths such as Natalie’s, I could not have imagined AFSP’s agenda is to push drugs that increase the likelihood of akathisia deaths.
After learning of AFSP’s pharma ties, I spoke with their chief medical officer for nearly an hour and asked why AFSP won’t take akathisia out of the darkness. (Their website makes no mention of akathisia and also promotes pharma’s “depression and chemical imbalance” marketing.) A guest post about my interaction with AFSP is here: https://fiddaman.blogspot.com/2016/09/
One cannot possibly give informed consent if the information is FLAWED or if one does not have all the NEGATIVE CLINICAL DATA TRIALS, at ones disposal.
DOCTORS do not manufacture DRUGS or VACCINES.
Kristina, thank you for doing something special to honor your daughter Natalie.
Don’t underestimate the butterfly effect.
People are starting to wake up and not take everything they hear and see as gospel.
People want honest facts.
If prominent professionals are not doing the right thing, word of mouth goes around.
Thank you Kristina. I have just read your guest post and found it deeply moving.
I have been practising and/or studying medicine continuously for the last fifty three years, and I too had never heard of AKATHISIA when my daughter was inappropriately prescribed an SSRI. All she needed were a few words of encouragement and reassurance about a new, temporary job and exam concerns discussed with a locum GP. Instead, thoughtless prescribing lead to serial misdiagnosis and cascade iatrogenesis; with incarceration and brutality from those whose DUTY it was to care and to understand. This started ten years ago.
We have watched as her stolen years of beauty, and all of life’s critical opportunities have passed by, albeit with tiny increments of recovery from the drug-wrecked, grievous bodily harm inflicted upon her by denial of, ignorance of, and/or wilful blindness of prescribers re AKATHISIA.
The profession that I loved. worked so very hard for, and sacrificed so much of her, and her sister’s childhood for, destroyed the daughter whom I loved even more. I appreciate how privileged we are to still have her with us, so severely injured: physically, psychologically and socially. Our love as a family is refocused on her care and our decade of attempted rehabilitation. We grieve relentlessly for the enchantment with which she enriched every day of our lives before her prescription drug destruction. We also recognise that without the care, compassion, wisdom and courage of a REAL EXPERT in psychopharmacology, the cascade iatrogenesis and repeated misdiagnosis of ADRs as ‘Severe Mental Illness” – (with each fatuous label leading to greater and greater, forced prescription drug injury) – would eventually have taken her from us.
What is the matter with these people that with regard to AKATHISIA, they appear to have discarded the basic tenets of decent and safe medical practice?
I too have spent much of my last ten years striving to bring AKATHISIA out of the darkness. At some time there has to come a tipping point and this dreadful ADR must surely become widely recognised. It would appear, however, that those professing to prevent suicide may be the least likely to facilitate such progress.
Reminds me one of the PFS suicide stories in which family gathered funds for a mental health awareness charity instead a drug safety. Ironically leading to more identical suicides given how PFS is similar to PSSD.
Sooner or later this lot will fall out with each other – must be huge hidden rewards for the ‘collaboration’ to come about
How 10 Biopharma Companies are Working Together to Bring Medicines to Patients Faster
The accelerated process to develop and gain regulatory approval for multiple vaccines has also been eye-opening to biopharmaceutical insiders, as well as regulatory agencies. It’s spotlighted new and exciting possibilities for quickly and collectively developing other therapies that can benefit patients in the future, while streamlining the review process to make it more efficient (that’s even the topic of a recently published article in Frontiers in Medicine, Regulatory Science). How can industry and regulators build a modernized, tech-savvy, interactive approval system to safely speed up the development of other novel therapies and future vaccines?
Competitors become partners
To start to answer that question,10 biopharmaceutical companies (Pfizer, Amgen, Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb, Astellas, Sanofi, GSK, Janssen, Roche, and Lilly) came together in July 2020 to form the nonprofit Accumulus Synergy, which is building a data-sharing platform that supports real-time exchange of information with regulators, stored safely and securely in the cloud.
Taking on board the information can be corrupted – how it’s disseminated is
The more you look the more convolted it becomes eg ‘Pfizer’s practices adhere to the principles for responsible data sharing laid out by the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA).’ Pfizer believes that it is important for researchers, trial participants, regulators, and others acting in the best interest of patients to have access to clinical trial information to advance medical understanding and progress. It’s also important that this access works in ways that protect patient privacy, preserve regulatory authority and maintain incentives for those who generate data to conduct new research.
Pfizer publicly shares results from our clinical trials, whether the results are neutral, negative or positive. We also share data gathered in clinical trials we sponsor with trial volunteers, researchers, and others. And Prescribers mainly doctors are often the recruiters for trials so how do they fit in with having the right of access to the data along with participants ?Do they need to request permission from the participants they recruit? I was asking this of often well meaning but pointless ethics cttees 20 yrs ago but have lost touch with where they fit in nowadays. Pharma co’s themselves are allowing volunteers /participants access .
OUR SCIENCE/Clinical Trials/ Trial Data & Results
CLINICAL TRIAL DATA SHOULD BE ACCESSIBLE AND TRANSPARENT
At Pfizer we believe all participants should have access to clinical trial data to advance medical understanding and promote data transparency.
Pfizer believes that it is important for researchers, trial participants, regulators, and others acting in the best interest of patients to have access to clinical trial information to advance medical understanding and progress. It’s also important that this access works in ways that protect patient privacy, preserve regulatory authority and maintain incentives for those who generate data to conduct new research.
Pfizer publicly shares results from our clinical trials, whether the results are neutral, negative or positive. We also share data gathered in clinical trials we sponsor with trial volunteers, researchers, and others.
There are several ways in which we share trial results and data:
We submit clinical trial results for publication in peer reviewed journals within 18 months of primary completion date.
After the completion of those studies, we provide results on ClinicalTrials.gov and the EU Clinical Trials Register within the timelines required by US law and regulations issued by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (generally within 12 months from the primary completion date), and the European Medicines Agency (within 6 months from the end of trial for studies conducted in pediatric populations and/or adult studies included in a Pediatric Investigation Plan, and within 12 months from the end of trial for studies conducted in adult populations), respectively.
We provide access to detailed clinical data in response to legitimate request from researchers and regulators.
Learn how to request patient-level data (there has been a point raised re the need to be able to ask in depth questions of identified individuals (Just having data is inadequate even also supposing it’s not corrupted)
We post clinical study report (CSR) synopses on our website with a link to the data on clinicaltrials.gov.
View our synopses online
We provide easy-to-read summaries of trial findings to qualifying clinical trial participants who wish to receive them, and we are piloting use of the HHS’s “Blue Button” application to allow U.S. trial volunteers to receive their own data back from the trial in a portable electronic format.
See how we return data to patients
We participate in collaborative data-sharing initiatives such as Project Datasphere.
Once the new medicines they have their eyes on have been approved as complying to ‘responsible sharing’ under the principles above, and then the regulatory bodies such as MHRA, FDA have approved them as rapidly and shabbily as it looks ,seems the biggest pharma co’s networking together are out to make a potential killing
Tim, I grieve with and your family, knowing how heartbreaking it must be to see your beautiful daughter suffer the way she did.
When one of your loved ones suffer – the people caring suffer, also!
AKATHISIA, can sadly take anyone’s life, in a blink of an eyelid.
If you come out alive, your life will never be the same again.
What I will never comprehend, is how some educated professionals, whom we trust our whole lives with, exploit and do further harm by cascade iatrogenesis.
Once upon a time I believed in doctors, in medicines healing and had such a reverence for the Medical Establishment.
Sadly, now, I do not respect their professional opinion (s) or the tools they use.
I certainly do not put them on a pedestal or view them as some supernatural being(s) with super natural powers.
I see some of them as charlatans, practicing their ART with deceitful lotions and potions that do more harm than good.
Can someone please give me some faith in an establishment that are becoming so crafty for their own good!
I have been hoodwinked by the medical profession and have witnessed the onslaught of barbaric abuse to my loved ones.
Sadly, finding decent professionals is like finding a pin in the haystack.
With your skills and knowledge, Tim, I feel very saddened, that you were unable to interject and help your daughter from the pitfalls caused by cascade iatrogenesis.
This happened to me.
It happened to my loved ones.
I knew about it.
I tried to interject but it all fell on deaf ears. I failed dismally!
The professionals were the Bael from hell who had more power over those who knew better.
They kidnapped my loved ones and left them in a pit of hell when my loved ones succumbed to their demonic ways.
This is not medicine.
Tim, I do not believe we are progressing or evolving.
Big Pharma and many professionals are ‘hoodwinking us’ to believe what they want us to believe.
The real demons will never be part of the demonic equation because there are some who frankly do not care and will not blame the tools they use.
Medicine is no different than pulling a magic trick out of a hat. You never know if you are going to get a cute rabbit or a venomous viper.
Medicine has become an ART made up of trickery and deception and once I became fully awake, there was no turning back.
There is zero basis for SSRIs as effective “antidepressants”, from any theory and angle (let alone if one even allows that different theories and angles on the human brain are possible).
I recently replicated it, just to see how it goes. It was horrific, like a poisoning, and easy to see why: pretty much, the great “scientific” idea boils down to this: autoreceptors get regulated down, so that the other receptors (usually only with look to one) get more serotonin… Yet there is obviously nothing preventing it from getting downregulated too (at some point guaranteed, even with arbitrary “it’s slower” claims and so on). Or any number of other serotonin receptors than the one which happens to be looked at momentarily (as they always just compile their stuff decades after widespread use, and then always with extreme bias or automatic conclusions).
My experience was as of the whole serotonin system getting pretty much wiped out by a single dose fluoxetine and the sheer, indiscriminate onslaught of non-stop serotonin it produces for 2 or 3 days. Similar to when I take something that acts as an agonist on some receptor, but even more totally. (I have PSSD anyway, and like many I try out stuff, along with even taking another dose of fluoxetine.)
So: you are a fanatic about serotonin, like most authoritarian cultists and manhandlers (“scientists”) in the industry? Well, that’s precisely where an SSRI is a boneheaded idea, if you think the brain’s serotonin circuits are important. And that’s just the obvious self-contradiction, next to a myriad of other issues, side-effects or better theories about the brain or so-valled “depression” that are only hesitantly looked at sometimes.