The following is from the Health Sciences Institute's e-Alert (UK edition), 22 February 2012. It is something we should all be concerned about. Yet again, Big Pharma are behind the scenes pulling the strings that will have us all on prescription drugs. Their greed and arrogance are beyond compare. Read on, and once the shock is over take a stand against Big Pharma! There are always natural alternatives to pharmaceutical drugs...
Drugs for shy or eccentric people?
Dear Reader,
Brace yourself because I'm going to tell you something about yourself, which you were probably completely unaware of: Chances are you have a mental illness.
Or you soon might have... especially if the guidance given on mental health in the revised edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), is approved after its review.
Unfortunately, I'm not joking and neither am I losing my mind. There are major concerns that the new revised DSM-5, which will be implemented in 2013, will considerably increase the number of people judged mentally ill. It will also lower the threshold for diagnosing existing problems like Attention Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).
The more the merrier... at least for Big Pharma
The DSM is used by the American Psychological Association (APA) and the majority of mental health professionals in America — the world's largest health market. In fact, many health insurers in the US will only pay for mental health treatment or drugs if the disease was diagnosed according to DSM guidelines.
However, these updated guidelines won't only affect those in the US. Mental Health professionals around the world, including those in the UK, consult the World Health Organisation's (WHO) International Classification of Diseases to diagnose mental health problems, which is largely affected by the APA's dominance in the US.
What are the consequences?
Peter Kinderman, head of Liverpool University's Institute of Psychology, says that under the new guidelines many people who are shy, bereaved or eccentric now run the risk of being labelled as mentally ill.
Critics are concerned that Big Pharma is pulling the APA's strings behind the scenes. In recent years, close links between the APA and the pharmaceutical industry have been scrutinized, especially since the APA's board consists of many Pharma representatives and some APA members have also received funding from pharmaceutical companies.
A case in point is Dr. Alan Schatzberg, former chair of the psychiatry department at Stanford University, in the US. Schatzberg had to step down after it was discovered that he received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Big Pharma.
The real kicker is that even some APA panel members are concerned about the dubious DSM revision process. One of them said that many of the proposed new diagnoses were developed by a majority vote "on the level we would choose a restaurant".
So what, you stick your hand up if you think the name and set of symptoms of a 'new mental illness' has a good ring to it and will spin a few billion dollars in drug money... and the one with the most votes, gets to feature in the guidelines?
Someone must stop this madness!
Let the children play
The truth is, there are billions of dollars to be made out of mental illness and we all know Big Pharma won't miss any opportunity to fill it's pockets. In fact, mental illness is a staple for the US pharmaceutical market, which is valued at $700 Billion a year!
One WHO study has shown that 48 per cent of all Americans will fall under at least one of the categories listed in the DMS-4 (the manual currently in use), at some point in their lives... and the biggest target under these guidelines is children!
Under the current guidelines, any child who challenges his or her parents can be classified with having "oppositional defiant disorder". I mean really, show me one child who has never challenged his or her parents... it's part of the development process.
But since "oppositional defiant disorder" has been laid down as an existing 'mental illness' sales for paediatric drugs have increased by nearly a half. Bubble gum flavoured pills for childhood ADHD helped sales to hit $7.42bn in 2010, up from $4.05bn in 2006 and since the DMS-4 revision, the use of anti-depressants has risen by more than 400 per cent.
In 2010, Big Pharma spent $4.5bn on advertising, including displaying the names of drugs on toy building blocks in paediatrician's waiting rooms. The campaign was a massive success for the pharmaceutical industry, because four per cent of all children in the US are now taking some kind of prescription drug, helping anti-psychotics generate $15bn a year!
And the cost?
Apart from the fact that many of these drugs are often dangerous, it's ridiculous to think that in the US alone nearly 20 per cent of the population is now taking a psychotic drug. It's no wonder that prescription drug overdose has become one of the leading causes of death in recent years.
Health Sciences Institute e-Alert: 22 Feb 2012
Drugs for shy or eccentric people?
Dear Reader, Brace yourself because I'm going to tell you something about yourself, which you were probably completely unaware of: Chances are you have a mental illness.
Or you soon might have... especially if the guidance given on mental health in the revised edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), is approved after its review.
Unfortunately, I'm not joking and neither am I losing my mind. There are major concerns that the new revised DSM-5, which will be implemented in 2013, will considerably increase the number of people judged mentally ill. It will also lower the threshold for diagnosing existing problems like Attention Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).
The more the merrier... at least for Big Pharma
The DSM is used by the American Psychological Association (APA) and the majority of mental health professionals in America — the world's largest health market. In fact, many health insurers in the US will only pay for mental health treatment or drugs if the disease was diagnosed according to DSM guidelines.
However, these updated guidelines won't only affect those in the US. Mental Health professionals around the world, including those in the UK, consult the World Health Organisation's (WHO) International Classification of Diseases to diagnose mental health problems, which is largely affected by the APA's dominance in the US.
What are the consequences?
Peter Kinderman, head of Liverpool University's Institute of Psychology, says that under the new guidelines many people who are shy, bereaved or eccentric now run the risk of being labelled as mentally ill.
Critics are concerned that Big Pharma is pulling the APA's strings behind the scenes. In recent years, close links between the APA and the pharmaceutical industry have been scrutinized, especially since the APA's board consists of many Pharma representatives and some APA members have also received funding from pharmaceutical companies.
A case in point is Dr. Alan Schatzberg, former chair of the psychiatry department at Stanford University, in the US. Schatzberg had to step down after it was discovered that he received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Big Pharma.
The real kicker is that even some APA panel members are concerned about the dubious DSM revision process. One of them said that many of the proposed new diagnoses were developed by a majority vote "on the level we would choose a restaurant".
So what, you stick your hand up if you think the name and set of symptoms of a 'new mental illness' has a good ring to it and will spin a few billion dollars in drug money... and the one with the most votes, gets to feature in the guidelines?
Someone must stop this madness!
Let the children play
The truth is, there are billions of dollars to be made out of mental illness and we all know Big Pharma won't miss any opportunity to fill it's pockets. In fact, mental illness is a staple for the US pharmaceutical market, which is valued at $700 Billion a year!
One WHO study has shown that 48 per cent of all Americans will fall under at least one of the categories listed in the DMS-4 (the manual currently in use), at some point in their lives... and the biggest target under these guidelines is children!
Under the current guidelines, any child who challenges his or her parents can be classified with having "oppositional defiant disorder". I mean really, show me one child who has never challenged his or her parents... it's part of the development process.
But since "oppositional defiant disorder" has been laid down as an existing 'mental illness' sales for paediatric drugs have increased by nearly a half. Bubble gum flavoured pills for childhood ADHD helped sales to hit $7.42bn in 2010, up from $4.05bn in 2006 and since the DMS-4 revision, the use of anti-depressants has risen by more than 400 per cent.
In 2010, Big Pharma spent $4.5bn on advertising, including displaying the names of drugs on toy building blocks in paediatrician's waiting rooms. The campaign was a massive success for the pharmaceutical industry, because four per cent of all children in the US are now taking some kind of prescription drug, helping anti-psychotics generate $15bn a year!
And the cost?
Apart from the fact that many of these drugs are often dangerous, it's ridiculous to think that in the US alone nearly 20 per cent of the population is now taking a psychotic drug. It's no wonder that prescription drug overdose has become one of the leading causes of death in recent years.
No comments:
Post a Comment