<<Back to most read

Comment | Read Comments (37)

I was opposed to ADHD drugs for my child. I have eliminated preservatives, put her on a high protien diet, eliminated dyes, trans-fat, sugar, milk, wheat from her diet added omega-3. done behavior modification, therapy, had her tested for deficiencies, allergies etc. I'm not buying into its preservatives, wasn't that the rhetoric in the early 1990's? I've tried it all including just plain popping her on the hind end. The medication works, so if you don't like the "kiddie coke" then find a medication that will help these children without the harmful side-effects, then I, along with many other parents who hate the medication, will listen to what you have to say.

The so-called church of Scientology is a dangerous organization that is out to make money for itself and brainwash innocent people. Why the Hampshire Chronicle is quoting it when there is plenty of good science to be quoted is beyond me.

I invite readers to the two following websites for more information: http://www.cchr.org and http://www.FreedomMa g.org It IS because of Scientology and CCHR that sufficient public awareness of psych drugs resulted in a ground swell of public demand for accurate information. This caused the FDA to release what it long new, alarming reports of adverse effects of psych drugs. This led to the FDA's requiring Black Box Warning Labels. The psych and pharmaceutical incestious relationship generates $2 Trillion world wide. The drug companies have to increase the number on drugs to make their stocks increase in value. The psychiatric industry assists with their fraudlent "mental disease du jour" claims and their ever increasing percentage of "X" group now suffering from "Y" mental disease. As for children, at not time in the history of civilization has any society until now condoned or permitted the wholesale drugging of its future generation. Get the children off of Television, get them active in daily sports and get them nourished and in households in which parents and children speak and share household duties, and you will quickly find that children (who are not suffering from real physical dysfunctons) will do quite well.

[bold]The CCHR is a front group for the [quote]Church[/quote] of Scientology[/bold]. Why wasn't that mentioned in the article? The CCHR is not a creditable source. The CCHR has a nutty agenda, they see the psychiatric industry as competition to their expensive self help "religion". This article should come with a warning label.

The CCHR "About US": CCHR was founded in 1969 by the Church of Scientology and the internationally acclaimed author, Dr. Thomas Szasz, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry at the State University of New York, Syracuse. At that time, the victims of psychiatry were a forgotten minority group, warehoused under terrifying conditions in institutions around the world. Because of this, CCHR penned a Mental Health Declaration of Human Rights that has served as its guide for mental health reform. GOOD NEWS! Just since January 2007, with help of CCHR, 204 psychiatrists have been convicted, awaiting trial or awaiting sentencing for crimes that include child molestation, rape and insurance fraud.

The link to "About US" (also accessed from CCHR's home page (http://www.CCHR.org ) is: http://www.cchr.org/ index.cfm/5258

[italic]italic[/italic] my sixteen year old son was diagnosed last year. we live in a household where tv was never watched except at weekends, he is very active in sport and I have always tried to provide a healthy additive free diet. i am also a "full time" mum who has always been there for my kids. my son was always a challenge, and found school a difficult place to be. one concerta slow release tablet has made school a pleasant place to be and his whole life has improved. medication has to be weighed up against the challenges that these children face in our society without this aid. teachers and family now treat him in a different way as well. it is not an excuse for bad behaviour, but awareness of the condition can help to avoid possible pit-falls.

Preventing mentally ill people from seeking help when they need it is both unethical and irresponsible. The CCHR, who refer to themselves as a human rights organisation, is very selective in talking about it's links to the Church of Scientology. I wonder if we could use the FIA to finally find out which planet they believe they originated from.

CCHR is a front group for the Church of $cientology. The Church believes that human problems are caused by the souls of dead space aliens that stick to us (I am not joking). Psychiatrists were used to brainwash these deceased aliens into believing lies. This is why $cientiology has declared psychiatry and psychology public enemy #1. The CCHR is simply a publicity arm of the church. Why did the article not point this out?

Hello to everyone reading this commentary, As bluntness would appear to be the prevailing theme of both the article and the commentary, I shall adapt it in my own discourse. The substance of this article is the reporting of undisputed figures of an alarming and dangerous situation involving the mass drugging of children. Let’s be realistic. Those parents experiencing some relief from the effect of these drugs on their children are doing so at a cost that is perhaps beyond their immediate ability to appreciate. Psychotropic drugs have very real and permanent effects on the biochemistry of the human body, including severe changes to normal brain function. The “scientific” basis for these drugs is not a pre-diagnosed brain abnormality, but a suspicion that the changes these drugs effect, must be the root cause of the problem. This is a hit and miss stab in the dark reversal of cause and effect, totally unsubstantiated by any credible scientific methodology. What does exist on the scientific record is the dangerous and damaging effect these drugs have on the brain and the likelihood of inducing serious long term side effects including out right psychosis and possible suicide. So this is not about the odd child appearing to do better, this is a very serious issue. And to the parent with the ultimatum to the drug industry about improved drugs. The onus is not on the pharmaceutical industry to come up wit a miracle cure. That is never going to happen. The very nature of these drugs makes that an impossibility. The onus is on you as a parent to be fully informed about what it is you are doing. I suggest you pick up a copy of Robert Whitaker’s “Mad in America”, read it and re-evaluate your child’s need for these drugs. You can get it for a fiver on Amazon. Please don’t construe this as an attack on your parenting ability. I appreciate that you are dealing with real issues and the happiness of the people you love the most is at stake. And that is the reason I urge you read up on this. There is a very good reason the term “kiddie coke” was coined. It’s not a derogatory term dreamt up to scare people. It’s an undisputed fact that many psychotropic drugs are of the same chemical construction and classified in the same category as cocaine. So it should not come as a surprise that people taking psychiatric versions of this drug experience a “positive” effect. If I had the time and I thought there was a point, I’m sure we could get hundreds of recreational cocaine users on here singing the praises of modest cocaine use in taking the edge of life’s unpleasantries. So it’s really quite simple, if you don’t want your kids doing coke, then you won’t want them on psychotropic drugs. You could make superficial arguments about this, but the bottom line [bold]won’t move[/bold] .

No one is "preventing" anyone from taking mind altering drugs. Ritalin is a Class 2 drug, the same as cocaine. CCHR with its fast growing number of non-Scientology allies will continue to expand its reach throughout the world to document the crimes, fraud and human rights abuses of the psychiatric industry. Great progress has been made during the past two years, including the nearly 29,000 legal suits filed against pharmaceutical corporations for damage done to the plaintiffs and/or their dead family members because of psychiatric drugs.

To ensure there is no misunderstanding specific to Scientology and the medical profession: Scientologists go to medical doctors, as needed (which is not often compared to others) and do take medication, as required. Scientologists also take pain inhibitors. Approximately 11 years ago, the psychiatric industry -- in an attempt to position itself more intimately with medical doctors -- began a Public Relations campaign that changed "mental illness" to "brain disease" and "psychiatric drugs" to "psychiatric medicine." Do you honestly think that the psych and drug industries that receive a $2 trillion USD (worldwide) a year (primarily from taxes and insurance premiums)are going to do anything to clean up their own unethical practices? Currently in the United States, only two states (New York and Pennsylvania) still report the number of patients dying in state run psychiatric facilities. Until 1994, every state was required, and it was documented that more than 1,000,000 Americans died during a ten year period (1995-1994). How many people are dying in the UK’s psychiatric facilities? Anyone know?

Typographical error: "...more than 1,000,000 Americans died during a ten year period (1984-1994).

This is just another opportunity for the CCHR to spout its 'anti psychiatry' drivel by presenting selected facts out of context to forward its own agenda. Psychiatrists are medically trained doctors and aim to diagnose and treat the 1 in 4 of us with a mental health problem. There is enough stigma and discrimination about mental ill health as it is, and the CCHR and the Church of Scientology use this to further their cause, whatever that may be. Scientology is a 'cult' and is well documented as using 'brain washing' techniques'to recruit vulnerable people, including those with mental health problems. I guess that is why they are so threatened by psychiatry and psychology...or maybe it's just a result of the prejudice of the (dreadful) science fiction writer who created Scientology and its so called human rights wing, the CCHR. Psychiatry is about helping those who are unwell. The CCHR is about promoting the views of the Church of Scientology, which in turn is about profiting from the vulnerable.

Hmmm, interesting that you used the word "unethical" to describe the "psych and drug industries". I would counter with the claim that the Church of Scientology is guiltier of unethical practices than just about any other organization I can think of. They espouse a 'scientific' therapy called Dianetics, but there has never been any actual, published scientific evidence demonstrating its effectiveness. Where is the data? The only independent study ever conducted (http://xenu.net/arc hive/fischer/) found that: 1) dianetic therapy does not exert a systematic influence either favorably or adversely upon intellectual functioning; (2) dianetic therapy does not exert a systematic influence either favorably or adversely upon mathematical ability; and (3) dianetic therapy does not exert a systematic influence either favorably or adversely upon the degree of personality conflicts. Other unethical practices include, but are not limited to: using front groups like CCHR and Narconon to funnel people into Scientology, forcing members to "disconnect" with friends or family that the CHURCH deems enemies, unlawfully detaining members in labor camps ("Rehabilitation Project Force"), using thought reform tactics to obtain and retain members, and it's "Fair Game" policy of suing, slandering, harassing and threatening any and all critics of Scientology. Now, to say that Scientology is guilty of unethical practices does not relieve "psychs" or the drug industry of crimes of which they themselves may or may not be guilty. Yes, abuse occurs. But I would strongly question any statistics or claims the Church of Scientology makes about the abuse by others, when its own "proven science" is proved only by circumstantial evidence and NO scientific data, and it appears to be pointing fingers in order to hide its own history of abuse.

Anyone can become familiar with L Ron Hubbard's effective methods to better understand and resolve problems simply by visiting: http://www.Scientolo gyHandbook.org You mentioned DIANETICS ("what the soul is doing to the body"). Glad you did. Anyone can read L Ron Hubbard's first book posted on line at: http://www.dianetics -theevolutionofascie nce.org/ You mention Narconon. Glad you did. Mr. Hubbard made a major contribution in his drug detoxification program. One example is the program given free to anyone who helped in the cleanup of the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. More than 800 firemen and other emergency responders and workers who became extremely ill due to toxins ingested during their cleanup of the World Trade Center have recovered. Two recent newspaper articles reporting results: http://www.philly.co m/inquirer/health_sc ience/daily/20071007 _Clinics_results_mak e_9_11_responders_be lieve.html http://www.philly.co m/inquirer/hot_topic s/20071005_Patient_N o__1__and_a_towel_st ained_purple.html The Hubbard Sauna Detox method has received independent, peer-reviewed, mainstream scientific evidence supporting this method does indeed exist, and continues to gain momentum in respected scientific circles. A sampling of independent research (not connected to Scientology or Scientologists) which references and supports the Hubbard sauna detox method includes the following: RESEARCH PAPERS (available at the medical research PubMed.com website): Altern Ther Health Med. 2007 Mar-Apr;13(2):S154-6 . Components of practical clinical detox programs--sauna as a therapeutic tool. Crinnion W. Environmental Medicine Center of Excellence, Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine in Tempe, Arizona, USA. J Altern Complement Med. 1998 Spring;4(1):77-86. Chemical sensitivity after intoxication at work with solvents: response to sauna therapy. Krop J. St. Joseph's Health Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. BOOKS "Sauna Therapy" (Lawrence Wilson, MD); "Detoxify or Die" (Sherry A. Rogers, MD); "Sauna Detoxification Therapy" (Marilyn G. McVicker). Philadelphia Inquirer http://www.philly.co m/inquirer/health_sc ience/daily/20071007 _Clinics_results_mak e_9_11_responders_be lieve.html http://www.philly.co m/inquirer/hot_topic s/20071005_Patient_N o__1__and_a_towel_st ained_purple.html

I think the only person other than myself on the topic here is Karen. My daughter is also on Concerta. Weigh the benefits, Her quality of life has changed, ive read the reports and the labels, every mother who has their child on the drug is aware of the dangers, and not all the medications cause suicidal thoughts! Yes they are amphetamines, that do help our children. I can give an educated guess, that no one else on this post lives with a child with ADHD. My daughter is well nourished, eats well balanced meals, and gets to watch TV once a week on Saturday as a treat. She plays sports and does her chores and has a role in the family. while some children may be misdiagnosed, mine is not. My daughter has problems with impulse control, and on the medication she thinks before she acts, she has thanked me because she can concentrate enough to sit down and read and is able to play with other children, finish her classwork, and her best abilities are pronounced. You just don't know and never could understand how much her life has improved. Shame on all of you!!! like i said before, quit arguing that ADHD is not a real problem. Find the solution. Faux solutions like diet change is not acceptable for children with real ADHD.

The Church of Scientology is wrong ADHD does exist. That said artifical colours can make existing hyperactivity worse as it does in my twins so I avoid them. Avoiding these things doesn't make them not overactive at all though.

Actually, HealthMed IS connected to scientology (http://www.cs.cmu.e du/~dst/Library/Shel f/la90/la90-4a.html# healthmed) Those Philadelphia Inquirer articles are more examples of non-scientific "evidence". Publishing a book on Dianetics does not make it true. More non-scientific "evidence". If Scientology and Dianetics "works" by introducing a planned, coercive thought reform program, as I claim it does, then of course people SAY it works. If you're brainwashed, you don't know that you're brainwashed. The lack of hard evidence I believe speaks volumes of how false and dangerous those programs are. But these ladies are correct, this is all off-topic. I personally believe that ADD and ADHD are likely diagnosed too quickly, but that there do exist cases where medication is necessary. Perhaps we are overmedicated as a society, but at least there is published scientific data to support the efficacy of drugs. There is NO SCIENTIFIC DATA supporting Scientology, Dianetics, or Narconon detox programs. There is only the claim that it works, which is drilled into Scientologists.

There should be reasoned discourse concerning the use of medication with children. But groups like the CCHR muddy the debate by insinuating their dogma into it. The CCHR is simply anti-psychiatry, and even tried to blame 9/11 and the holocaust, very dubiously, on psychiatry. Thats not reasoned debate, thats a smear campaign. One of the leading british heads of CCHR even admitted that she believes the majority of psychiatrists are actually "evil". This article was a pretty superficial examination of the issue of medicating children, and of the CCHR itself.

Stephanie, Your daughter has a problem with "impulse control." You're doing the best you can. The existence of a category or a named symptom is NOT the issue. The issue is the fraudulent promotion of a fictitious "reason" called chemical imbalance that is used to drug children. They never were before and we had a healthy, saner culture. Now every aspect of society, from how to raise children, to school curriculum to the judicial system -- even to training of ministers and priests is impacted by psychiatric dogma. In the comments posted by myself and Jon Ronquist (whom I do not know) you have information and website links that of which you may not have previously been aware. I wish you well and your daughter a happy and healthy life. James Lightfield

Regardless of what their motives are, I think the bottom line is that the CCHR relies on unscientfic sources for their criticism of the psychiatric community. Perhaps there is a small percentage of psychiatrists who commit crimes. Well, society at large is filled with criminals. Does that mean that we must condemn everyone? And the CCHR's data that they cite is ridiculously skewed. They claim that 10,000 people a year die in mental institutions. Or their assertion that psychiatry was responsible for both the Holocaust and 9-11. Where do they get these figures from? Also, they cite the fact that no psychiatrists can actually cure psychiatric ailments. This is true, though there are many conditions of a non-psychiatric nature that are incurable as well. Should we condemn all doctors based on this? For the CCHR to claim that good nutrition can solve all of our problems in ludicrous. And the CCHR is NOT an independent organization. Both Scientology and the CCHR follow the same ideologic line. In short, they are not a credible authority on the nature of the psychiatric profession. Remember, psychiatry is based on scientific studies and peer reviewed data to support their assertions. CCHR has at best anecdotal evidence and some rogue anti-psychiatry psychiatrists to back up their position. Granted, psychiatry is not perfect, and being a watchdog group dedicated to reforming the profession is fine. We need organizations like that. But to promote ONLY the destruction of psychiatry and not healthy critique of it is both unfair to psychiatric patients, but to the public at large. Maybe we need a CCHR watchdog group.

well said.

[bold]How many people are dying in UK's psych facilities? Anyone know?[/bold]

Just for the interest of James Lightfield. I've spent several months in a mental health institution (you refer to as 'psych facility') for severe depression and anxiety. In all my time there, there were no fatalities (despite several people being suicidal) or even self inflicted injuries. I recieved great treatment - good drugs and lots of therapy. I feel good today and grateful to the doctors who helped me help myself.

[bold]How many people are dying in UK's psych facilities? Anyone know?[/bold] No answer? Why not?

I find Scientology to be amusing and all, but this is getting to be downright silly. You've got to figure that anyone whose beliefs are based on the psychotic (read: drugged up) ramblings of a science fiction novellist are willing to believe anything, including that 9/11 and the holocaust were caused by a great, transcends-time-itse lf psychiatric conspiracy. So, psychiatry does some good in helping these kids lead better lives, a method that doesn't involve their particular brand of idiocy. To them, it can't be right. What's what? "LRH" didn't come up with it, or at least claim he was there at the start? Then it must be false! Of course, these people believe that large doses of niacin and sauna therapy will cure radiation poisioning and prevent further damage simply because L. Ron told them it was true.

[bold]How many people are dying in UK's psych facilities? Anyone know?[/bold] Still no answer. Why not?

The world’s most respected theologians and religious scholars, including Urbano Alonso Galan, a Vatican advisor on non-Catholic religions and Fumio Sawada, leader of Japan’s oldest religion (Yu-itsu Shinto), did individual in-depths studies. Each concluded that Scientology is a religion in every aspect. Read what these scholars wrote: http://www.bonafides cientology.org/Appen d/07/index.htm

So what if CCHR has links to Scientology? (To be fair to them they [italic]are[/italic] upfront about it). This issue is about psychiatric junkscience and the drugging of children for questionable "disorders". Personally I think this is a subject of [italic]huge[/italic] importance and fair play to anyone who wishes to highlight it. The actual science behind 'ADHD' is indeed controversial. In fact there is no valid evidence to establish ADHD as a medical/neurological disease, "chemical imbalance" or brain abnormality. There is no medical test that can be done to show it's existence ('testing' is purely subjective, based on questionnaires, checksheets and opinion). In fact there is no evidence to confirm that ANY mental 'disorder', as propagated by the psychiatric industry, is medical in nature or that the drugs used in "treatment" are anything other than non-specific alterers of normal brain physiology. Claims to the contrary are usually made by organisations with strong ties to the pharmaceutical industry. A recent study undertaken in America found that 100% of psychiatrists who compile the diagnostic criteria for all mood and psychotic disorders (a category where the first line treatment is usually drug-use) has ties to drug companies. "No abnormality of serotonin in depression has ever been demonstrated." David Healy M.D., psychiatrist, former Secretary of the British Association for Psychopharmacology; author of "Let Them Eat Prozac". "Chemical imbalance...it's a shorthand term really, it's probably drug industry derived. We don't have tests because to do it." Dr. Mark Graff, Chair of the Committee of Public Affairs for the American Psychiatric Association. To date, no individual or organisation has yet to provide scientifically valid evidence for the following: 1. EVIDENCE THAT CLEARLY ESTABLISHES the validity of 'schizophrenia,' 'depression' or other 'major mental illnesses' as biologically-based brain diseases. 2. EVIDENCE FOR A PHYSICAL DIAGNOSTIC EXAM -- such as a scan or test of the brain, blood, urine, genes, etc. -- that can reliably distinguish individuals with these diagnoses (prior to treatment with psychiatric drugs), from individuals without these diagnoses. 3. EVIDENCE FOR A BASELINE STANDARD of a neurochemically-bala nced 'normal' personality, against which a neurochemical 'imbalance' can be measured and corrected by pharmaceutical means. 4. EVIDENCE THAT ANY PSYCHOTROPIC DRUG can correct a 'chemical imbalance' attributed to a psychiatric diagnosis, and is anything more than a non-specific alterer of brain physiology. For more information visit: http://www.mindfreed om.org http://ahrp.blogspot .com/ For information on "ADHD" and the junkscience behind it visit: http://www.adhdtesti ng.org http://www.adhdfraud .org http://www.ritalinde ath.com

Just go ahead and Google James Lightfield and you'll find he is a $cientologist and a $cientology apologist, whose main job appears to be to comment on every news item that is critical of his ludicrous "beliefs", sorry, pyramid scheme to wrest money from the gullible. The "Church" has people all round the world constantly rebutting any criticism of their phoney "religion". And our James is one of them. And has probably paid a lot of money to free himself of the body thetans and other such nonsense.

I have noticed the same thing about Mr. Lightfield. He is everywhere. But to sort of answer his question about how many deaths there are in UK psych facilities, I found an article that sheds some light on it, which can be found here: http://www.guardian. co.uk/prisons/story/ 0,,2174115,00.html According to the article, 600 people died "in all forms of custody" in 2006. This includes being in prison or in a state run lock down psychiatric hospital. It does not say anything about normal, publicly accessible psychiatric units. So, the article says that 200 of the 600 are suicides, and 400 of the 600 are from natural causes. This is a small number. By comparison, the amount of suicides in the US among U.S. white male medical doctors per year is about 250. This includes psychiatrists, dentists, podiatrists, oncologists, etc. Source: http://www.emedicine .com/emerg/topic952. htm So, we've possibly had more doctors kill themselves in the US in 2006 than the 200 people who have died in state custody in the UK. The two figures are simply anecdotal on my part, and shouldn't be seen as hard evidence that there is a correlation between them. It's just to prove a point: the CCHR should cite credible, independent, and objective sources for their information. Evidence from iconoclastic psychiatrists is not objective. Granted, psychiatrists who criticize psychiatry are not necessarily a bad thing. But when they ignore evidence to protect their worldviews (like to say that schizophrenia doesn't exist or that there's no evidence of a chemical imbalance in the brain that causes it), they cross the bridge over from skepticism to cynicism. On a final note, the CCHR seems to operate with more presumption than the current skeptics movement that seeks to test the validity of ESP or the existence of ghosts. If there is no such thing as a chemical imbalance, then show us that the evidence supporting that theory is flawed, or give us your own data. Neurological data. I am not optimistic though. Argument with the CCHR seems to always lead to either sparkling generalities or ad hominem attacks. We're here. We're listening. Give us a real reason to believe you.

@James: "How many people are dying in UK's psych facilities? Anyone know?" That is a loaded question, the same as a commercial for the local news saying something like "What is in YOUR FOOD that could KILL YOU?! Find out at 11." It implies that there are fatalities in such facilities, numerous enough to cause panic. And yet I've seen no evidence or numbers. Well, why don't YOU answer that question then? If you really don't know the answer, then how do you know that the answer isn't zero? @Michael Western: I think it makes a huge difference that the CCHR has links to Scientology. It's not just a link, the CCHR serves as a front group to funnel people into Scientology, and espouses their vitriolic anti-psychiatry agenda. I posit that the REAL reason Hubbard promoted this agenda (and thus became part of Scientology's agenda, besides getting everyone "on the bridge") is that Scientology/Dianetic s is threatened by psychiatry. It's simple economics. Scientology wants to be the only mental health racket around, and the only way they can do that is to lie to and trick people by slandering psychiatrists and drug companies. Again, I am NOT saying that abuses don't occur between doctors and patients, or that pharmaceutical use is higher than it needs to be. And if Scientology/Dianetic s/Narconon actually worked, then I might not have such a problem with it being an alternative to classical psychiatry. But Scientology --and by extension, Nacronon, CCHR, etc-- has _no_ scientific data to support their claims. NONE. There is NO SCIENTIFIC DATA. They seem to think that by asking sensational questions like "How many have died in 'psych' facilities?", that makes their methods somehow more legitimate. And let's talk about abuse for a moment. Lisa McPherson died at the hands of Scientology when she was denied actual medical treatment. If a member even KNOWS someone that is willing to voice their criticisms of the church, then they have to cut that person off or be kicked out of the the group, even if it is a family member or close friend. If a member even questions any directives of the church (which is a more appropriate term than "teachings of the church"), their 'ethics' are found to be 'out', and can be forced to perform manual labor. In the right situation, they can be sent to a FORCED LABOR CAMP. I'm not really hoping to reach James and the other apologists, they are obviously deep into this cult. I believe they mean well, I truly do, but they have been subjected to a coercive thought-reform program. I know that they have seen contradictions and abuses in their group, but have been discouraged from coming forward, because to disagree with ANYTHING in the church is tantamount to an Ethics violation (heresy), and thus punishment. But to anyone else out there, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do research on what Scientology actually teaches, and not just what they say they teach: www.xenu.net www.xenu-directory.n et www.scientology-lies .com

In regards to the whole chemical imbalance theory, I read an interesting article that can be found here: http://www.intenex.n et/pipermail/mindfre edom-news/2005-Novem ber/000017.html In short, studies have shown that the drugs were more effective than placebo for depression. However, another study put forth in this article says that ssri's are no more effective than placebo in some patients. The chemical imbalance theory appears to lack evidence. Despite this though, ssri's have alleviated depression regardless of what any of us preach about them. I should know. I take drugs for my depression, and some drugs have worked, and others haven't. Would I prefer to be on a drug that is alleviating my suffering, or would I go to a Scientology mission and take a class or get some auditing. Well, I'd rather take drugs that atleast have some demonstrated efficacy. The evidence behind Scientology techniques is anecdotal at best, and at worst placebo effect.

The figures for Hampshire come from the NHS, not from the Scientology-funded group. Controversy and concern about the science behind the definition and diagnosis of ADHD come from many sources, not just Scientology. These concerns deserve to be heard, unless one thinks that foxes should be allowed to guard henhouses. (I am not, nor have ever been, a Scientologist, nor have anything to do with that organization).

Wow James, can you answer you own question instead of repeating it time and time again? Lets face facts. Far to many adults and children are on these meds. That doesn't mean the meds don't work. The proof is in the millions of lives and families these meds have saved over the years. Do we need more study and better controls. Of course we do. But CCHR, scientology and James Lightfield have one goal in mind. To keep anyone from getting these meds or mental heath help that is not tied to scientology and the silly stuff Hubbard wrote over fifty years ago. This man had no training in any health field and really didn't know what he was talking about. He wrote a simple self heath book that pretty much copied from books other people had writen before. He had no real training or science to back up his books or claims. Histry has shown that Hubbards life and his claims were lies and scientology and CCHR still repete those lies. James's question was ment to mislead and confuse. Its not how many have died. These people were sick to start with. Its how did they die and what was done to prevent it. But James won't tell you that. He will toss a number out there that will shock you untill you know it covers 50 to a 100 year time span. Don't let cchr/scientology smoke and mirrors fool you. Check for yourself. And to learn more about the cchr/scientology connection check out xenu.net and xenutv.com

James Lightfield wrote: " It was documented that more than 1,000,000 Americans died during a ten year period (1995-1994). " Can we have a non scientology sorce for this claim James? I would love to check it out.

Share this: Digg | del.icio.us | Furl | reddit | Facebook | Yahoo! | What's this?

What are these links for?

If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.

At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.

Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.

More on Digg

More on del.icio.us

More on Furl

More on reddit

More on NowPublic/

More on Yahoo!

Archive