NoMoreFakeNews - CHO, THE VIRGINIA MURDERS, AND THE DRUG QUESTION
 
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 03:24:40 -0500 (CDT)


**** note:   This is a private list.  I send out alerts, useful news 
items, and comment to a group of mental health professionals, decision 
makers and activists. (OK to repost and to include this header and 
comments).  If you do not want to receive any of these emails, please 
let me know. To preserve privacy,  I blind copy the entire list.     
Vince Boehm  ***

*

http://nomorefakenews.com/index.php

    *This just in from Jon Rappoport.   Vince*

    *CHO, THE VIRGINIA MURDERS, AND THE DRUG QUESTION*

    *APRIL 18, 2007. Reports have surfaced that the accused murderer of
    33 people at Virginia Tech was briefly under medical care for
    depression. So the question naturally arises: was he taking SSRI
    antidepressants? Prozac? Zoloft? Paxil? *
    * *
    *These drugs are known to cause suicides and murders. That is, the
    person taking them kills himself or others. *
    * *
    *Glaxo, the maker of Paxil, has been under the gun for some time
    now, because it knew Paxil had problems and concealed those problems
    from the FDA and doctors and the public. *
    * *
    *The lawsuits against Glaxo, sitting in line like ships waiting to
    dock, have mainly concerned so-called "discontinuation syndrome."
    This is a fancy euphemism for "withdrawal effects." In other words,
    the drug makes addicts. And when people try to withdraw from it,
    even gradually, all sorts of hell can break out. *
    * *
    *But under the surface, there is more. I'll lead up to that by
    quoting from an excellent April 26, 2006, article published at
    Scoop, and written by Evelyn Pringle. My comments are in brackets. *
    * *
    *"The [Paxil] withdrawal syndrome is real and in fact, it is now
    known that infants of women who take SSRIs in the last 3 months of
    pregnancy, may experience symptoms of withdrawal, including
    convulsions, according to a study published in the February 4, 2005
    issue of the journal Lancet. *
    * *
    *[DID YOU GET THAT? CONVULSIONS IN INFANTS. JR] *
    * *
    *"In addition, experts warn against the use of Paxil and other SSRIs
    with children. According to Fred Baughman Jr, MD, an adult and child
    neurologist in private practice for 35 years, 'most antidepressants
    have not proved effective in treating depression in children and
    some studies suggest they may cause some children to become acutely
    suicidal.' *
    * *
    *"Yet in 2002, Dr Baughman says, 'nearly 11 million prescriptions
    for the drugs were given to children, 2.7 million of them to
    children under 12.' *
    * *
    *[IT ISN'T JUST STREET DRUGS, FOLKS. JR] *
    * *
    *"A report by an expert witness [in a lawsuit against Glaxo],
    previously sealed with a protective order, reveals how Glaxo
    concealed and manipulated data concerning Paxil-induced suicidality
    and how suicide attempts in studies by patients on Paxil were
    underreported and attempts by people taking a placebo were inflated. *
    * *
    *[HELLO. GLAXO SAID SUICIDES WERE FEWER THAN THEY WERE. THEY ALSO
    CLAIMED SUICIDE ATTEMPTS IN THE CONTROL GROUP, THE PEOPLE TAKING A
    SUGAR PILL, WERE HIGHER THAN THEY REALLY WERE. TO MAKE IT SEEM THAT
    PAXIL DID NOT POSE A THREAT TO COMMIT SUICIDE. GET IT? JR] *
    * *
    *"Excerpts from the report were published by psychiatrist, Peter
    Breggin, MD, in Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry, (Volume 8,
    Spring 2006, pp. 77-84). Dr Breggin is a founder of the
    International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology
    (ICSPP) and the author of the Antidepressant Fact Book (2001). *
    * *
    *"His report also documents how Glaxo hid the incidence of akathisia
    (agitation with hyperactivity) and stimulation, which he says, are
    known risk factors for suicidality and violence. *
    * *
    *[VIOLENCE. LIKE KILLING SOMEBODY. JR] *
    * *
    *Dr Breggin's original report was based on a 3-day review of Glaxo's
    sealed files, and was written for the California case of Lacuzong v
    GSK, and attached to a July 21, 2001, affidavit submitted in a case
    filed by the widow of a man who drowned their two children and
    himself in a tub after taking Paxil for three days. *
    * *
    *[A MAN TAKES PAXIL FOR 3 DAYS AND THEN KILLS HIS CHILDREN AND
    HIMSELF. JR] *
    * *
    *"At Glaxo's insistence, the report remained sealed. However, in the
    more recent case of Moffett v Glaxo, in the US District Court for
    the South District of Mississippi, the report was filed in the
    public record. *
    * *
    *"'The drug companies,' says Dr Breggin, 'settle almost all legal
    cases brought against them in order to seal incriminating scientific
    data.' *
    * *
    *[IN ORDER TO HIDE THE TRUTH. THE DRUG COMPANY AGREES TO PAY THE
    PLAINTIFF A LOT OF MONEY, ON THE CONDITION THAT THE DETAILS OF THE
    RELEVANT REPORTS ARE BURIED. JR] *
    * *
    *"'The publication of a previously sealed medical expert report is a
    rare event,' he [Breggin] explains, 'the first in my experience.'" *
    * *
    *End of Scoop snip *
    * *
    *How do you like those apples? "Well, sure, some people who take our
    drug kill themselves or other people, but that's OUR information. We
    don't have to tell anybody about it. I mean, the drug is our
    property, so then all the information pertaining to it that we
    discover is ours, too." *
    * *
    *So the question again: was Cho taking one of these SSRI
    antidepressants? *
    * *
    *Following me so far? I hope you are. I have one more wrinkle to
    feed you. *
    * *
    *The drug companies definitely do NOT want a very clear law to pass
    WITH MUCH PUBLICITY---a law that states they CAN conceal any
    information they want to about their drugs. Why not? Because then it
    would be open hunting. People, doctors, whoever, could say, "Screw
    you. Since you can hide any adverse effects you want to, we won't
    use your drugs." The drug companies want to slime along the fence in
    the dark, without publicity, without notice. They want to exist in a
    gray area between some revealing and some concealing. And they're
    willing to pay for this privilege with big cash settlements in
    lawsuits. They know the numbers. They've figured out how much they
    can give away and still make out like bandits on the sales of their
    drugs. *
    * *
    *An interesting business, the drug business. *
    * *
    *JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com *
    * *

FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted () ) material the use of 
which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright 
owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to 
advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, 
ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this 
constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided 
for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This 
material is distributed without profit.