"For What Possible Use Should You Keep Such A Treacherous And Savage Creature?" Marcus Tullius Cicero
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Fraudulent Argument On Health Reform
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Creating Health 'Exchange' Entrenches Obamacare
Last week, Cato Institute health care policy expert Michael Cannon testified before the Missouri Senate’s Interim Committee on Health Insurance Exchanges on why that state should not create an Obamacare exchange. His arguments apply just as much to Michigan, including this excerpt describing how creating an exchange will help entrench Obamacare.
From testimony delivered on Sept. 15, 2011
Some opponents of the law nevertheless argue for creating an exchange so that states can be prepared in case the law is not overturned or repealed. Yet creating an exchange would entrench the law and make it less likely to be repealed or overturned.
• First, creating an exchange lends a veneer of legitimacy to the law. The Obama administration heralds the creation of each new exchange as proof that the law is gaining acceptance, and heralds states accepting the federal grants available under the law in the same manner.
• Second, declaring the law unconstitutional but then accepting the funding it offers and creating an exchange undermines the credibility of state officials seeking to overturn the law and also undermines the lawsuits themselves. One federal judge who overturned the law wrote that the fact that some of the plaintiff states are themselves implementing the law undercuts their own argument that he should order the federal government to halt implementation.
• Third, to create an exchange is to create a taxpayer-funded lobbying group dedicated to fighting repeal. An exchange's employees would owe their power and their paychecks to this law. Naturally, they would aid the fight to preserve the law.
• Fourth, both Congress and the courts are less likely to eliminate actual government bureaucracies that have assembled dedicated constituencies than they are to eliminate theoretical ones. The more disruptive repeal would be, the less likely it becomes.
• Fifth, many knowledgeable observers believe few exchanges, state or federal, will be operational by 2014. If states like Missouri create their own exchanges, they will begin handing out billions of taxpayer dollars sooner than if the federal government creates them. Creating a state-run exchange will hasten the day when the private insurance companies that receive those subsidies plow much of the money back into fighting repeal.
• Sixth, and perhaps most important, due to a recently discovered glitch in the statute, the new health care law only authorizes premium assistance in state-run exchanges — not federal exchanges. States thus have the collective power to deny the Obama administration the legal authority to dispense more than a half-trillion dollars in new entitlement spending, to expose the full cost of the law's mandates and government price controls, as well as to enforce the law's employer mandate — simply by not creating exchanges. If Missouri joins other states in refusing to create an exchange, it can essentially force Congress to reconsider the law. If Missouri instead creates an exchange, it will increase the federal deficit and debt, hide the full cost of the health care law, expose Missouri employers to penalties and reduce the likelihood of repeal.
The Obama administration is offering financial inducements to states to create exchanges because the administration knows that every new exchange helps them shield the law from Congress, the courts, and the American people. Creating an exchange is not a hedging-your-bets strategy but a sabotaging-your bets strategy.
Full text of eye-opening testimony here."
New HHS Media Policy Called A "Soviet Style Power Grab"
The new media policy requires all HHS employees to notify the agency’s office of public affairs about contact with the media and coordinate any interview requests with the office. It also discourages off-the-record conversations without prior approval.
Jim Dickinson, editor of FDA Webview and FDA Review, issued a scathing critique of the new guidelines. In an email to Richard Sorian, assistant secretary of public affairs at DHS, Dickinson said the guidelines would make reporting anything but the agency’s spin next to impossible.
“The new formal HHS Guidelines on the Provision of Information to the News Media represent, to this 36-year veteran of reporting FDA news, a Soviet-style power-grab,” Dickinson wrote. “By requiring all HHS employees to arrange their information-sharing with news media through their agency press office, HHS has formalized a creeping information-control mechanism that informally began during the Clinton administration and was accelerated by the Bush and Obama administrations.”
“By taking control of who says what to whom and when, these new guidelines strike a heavy blow against the full, unfettered First Amendment rights of both HHS employees and the news media,” Dickinson continued. “They expand the comfort zones of the powerful.”
A spokesperson at the HHS was not aware of the issue. When asked if Sorian was available for comment, the spokesperson directed TheDC to send an email to the public affairs office. Thus far, there has been no response to the e-mail.
When called later on, Sorian’s office said he was not available. An email to Sorian was also not returned.
Upon entering office, President Obama pledged to run the most transparent and open administration in history.
Monday, September 26, 2011
Doctors Risk "Professional Suicide" With Drug Alerts
Doctors Risk "Professional Suicide" With Drug Alerts
Doctors risk ‘professional suicide’ with drug alerts
By Dan Buckley and Fiachra Ó Cionnaith
Saturday, September 24, 2011
DOCTORS and academics risk "professional suicide" if they reveal the adverse side-effects of anti-depressants and other psychiatric medicines, a leading academic psychiatrist has claimed.
Irish-born professor of psychiatry at Cardiff University in Wales, Prof David Healy, also hit out at any of his colleagues who, he said, put the benefits of major pharmaceutical companies ahead of patients.
"Invitations to apply for better jobs, to attend conferences, or simply to go with colleagues to local eateries funded by drug companies are ever less likely to happen for doctors linked to adverse events," argued the professor, who has repeatedly raised concerns over the issue in Britain.
"Offers to describe problems at professional meetings are turned down and journals are ever less likely to accept publications outlining a new problem," he said.
Prof Healy was speaking before an address to the one-day seminar: Mad Medicine: Do Conflicts of Interest Drive You Crazy? organised by the European Public Health Alliance, which will be held at University College Cork today.
According to Prof Healy, pharmaceutical companies are legally obliged to agree that their drugs may cause people to die by suicide while senior medical academics are not.
"And here is where they offer one of the greatest services they can to companies — they can and regularly do offer apologies for industry. They have become industry’s way around the law and any moral code that may apply in this domain," Prof Healy said.
In his view, doctors reluctant to prescribe certain drugs because of anticipated adverse side-effects were likely to be accused of being a persecutor who victimises the patient by withholding effective treatment.
"Speaking up about a problem — once the material of medical advance — is now a recipe for professional suicide. When a doctor does report an adverse event to regulators, the report is invariably parked as uncertain and unreliable information," he alleged.
The close relationship between some pharmaceutical companies and a percentage of the medical profession has previously been highlighted in highly critical independent reports by the Oireachtas Health Committee and its Westminster equivalent.
The April 2007 Oireachtas report by the cross-party group raised specific concerns over how some pharmaceutical firms regularly influence doctors through "hospitality" services.
The Adverse Side-Effects of Pharmaceuticals report, based on a similar document drawn up by MPs in Britain in 2004, said pressing issues needed to be addressed immediately.
However, despite the serious concerns, one of the authors of the report, then Fine Gael TD Dr Liam Twomey, told the Irish Examiner in September 2008 that the findings had effectively been "shelved".
Other speakers at the seminar include Labour MEP Nessa Childers, Prof Agnes Higgins of Trinity College Dublin and John McCarthy of Mad Pride.
Thank You Prof Healy and a Hat Tip to If You're Going Through Hell Keep Going for finding this article.
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Lies, Fraud, & Your Vote: Fox News Changes Presidential Debate Results
Infowars.com has:
Fox News Pulls Poll Showing Ron Paul Debate Victory, Claims Mitt Romney Won
Poll showed Paul trouncing Romney by 11,000 votes
Paul Joseph Watson Infowars.com Friday, September 23, 2011
The establishment media’s relentless campaign to denigrate Congressman Ron Paul’s presidential campaign has manifested itself once again, after a poll showing Paul had won last night’s Orlando debate was pulled by Fox News who later published an article claiming Mitt Romney had instead claimed the victory.
When we took a screenshot of the poll at around 5am CST this morning, the result showed Paul easily beating his nearest rival Romney by 11,000 clear votes, with Paul at almost 40% and Romney trailing at just under 23%.
After our screenshot of the poll was posted on the ever-popular Drudge Report website, Fox News pulled the page that had previously housed the poll entirely. But the network went further,subsequently publishing an article by National Review editor and Fox News contributor Rich Lowry opining that Mitt Romney had in fact won the debate, thereby completely ignoring their own website poll, which restricts users to one vote per IP address.
Indeed, Lowry didn’t even mention Ron Paul once in his 13 paragraph piece, despite giving praise to Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and Herman Cain – all of whom performed miserably in Fox News’ own post-debate poll. Ron Paul got nearly double the amount of votes in the poll than all three of them put together, but Lowry completely omitted Paul’s name from his report.
As we have previously documented, Fox News, even more so than the likes of MSNBC and CNN, have constantly undermined Paul’s campaign with dirty tricks, including playing the wrong audio of a crowd booing Paul at this year’s CPAC event.
See the results of the original poll before Fox News pulled it below.
Thank You Mr Jones, Mr Watson and Infowars, for as Stalin observed:
It doesn't matter who votes. It matters who Counts the votes.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Depression And Bipolar Support Alliance (DBSA): Another PHARMA STORE FRONT
Leadership Circle $150,000 - 499,999
AstraZeneca
Wyeth Pharmaceuticals
Founders Club $10,000 - 149,999
Anonymous
Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
Eli Lilly and Company
Forest Laboratories
Janssen
Neuronetics, Inc.
Pfizer Inc
Schering-Plough Corporation
The Fine Foundation
The Henry Foundation, Inc.
2008: http://www.dbsalliance.org/pdfs/AR2008_FINAL.pdf
Leadership Circle
$150,000-499,999
AstraZeneca
Pfizer Inc.
Wyeth Pharmaceuticals
Founders Club
$10,000-149,999
Abbott Laboratories
American College of
Neuropsychopharmacology
Bank of America Foundation
Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
FMS
Group Health Cooperative
Health Central Network
The Henry Foundation, Inc.
Mr. Daniel Hynes
Kinschner Family Foundation
Mr. Gene L. Maynard
MJ Consulting Group
National Association
of State Mental Health
Program Directors
Schering-Plough Corporation
Soldiers of Love Inc.
Wisconsin Department of
Health & Family Services
2007: http://www.dbsalliance.org/site/DocServer/FINAL_AnnualReport07.pdf?docID=2761
LEADERSHIP CIRCLE
($150,000–$499,999)
AstraZeneca
Pfizer Inc
Wyeth Pharmaceuticals
FOUNDERS CLUB
($10,000–149,999)
Anonymous
Abbott Laboratories
Aetna Inc.
Chicago Area Project
Cyberonics, Inc.
Department of Veterans Affairs
Elli Lilly and Company
Forest Laboratories
GlaxoSmithKline
Group Health Cooperative
The HealthCentral Network, Inc.
The Henry Foundation, Inc.
Janssen
Mr. John Maguirre
The Curtis and Edith Munson
Foundation
National Association of State
Mental Health Program Directors
Organon, Inc.
Otsuka American Pharmaceutical
Inc
Mr. Louis Shwartz
Solders of Love Inc
Unifund CCR Partners
United States Trust Company
2006: http://www.dbsalliance.org/pdfs/2006AnnualReport.pdf
ALLIANCE LEAGUE
($500,000 AND ABOVE)
AstraZeneca
LEADERSHIP CIRCLE
($150,000–$499,999)
Abbott Laboratories
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Company
Wyeth Pharmaceuticals
FOUNDERS CLUB
($10,000–149,999)
Anonymous
C.G. Charitable Fund
Cyberonics, Inc.
Forest Laboratories
GlaxoSmithKline
Group Health Cooperative
The Henry Foundation, Inc.
Janssen
Terence A. Ketter, MD
The LaSalle Network
Neuronetics, Inc.
Organon, Inc.
Pfizer Inc
Mr. and Mrs. John Richardson
Shire Pharmaceuticals Inc.
State of Illinois
United States Trust Company
And now, on to CCHR's report:
(Formerly National Depressive and Manic-Depressive Association – NDMDA)
The NDMDA was one of the major front groups established in 1986 that could lobby Congress for further research funds and mental health budgets. They were formed shortly after psychiatristHerbert Pardes left the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) as director and was an advisor to NDMDA (since 2002 called the Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance, DBSA). By 1999, at least 7 NIMH psychiatrists were on its advisory board, including Charles Nemeroff who was Chairman of the Board of Directors Executive Committee (whose conflicts of interest with the pharmaceutical industry recently came under Senate Finance Committee investigation). During the decade following the establishment of NDMDA (and similar groups), federal funds to the NIMH budget increased 233%—from a total of $1.7 billion between 1978 and 1986 to more than $5.6 billion in the decade following. Since 1987 the NIMH budget has increased nearly 1,000%—in 2008 reported at almost $19 billion.[1]
The pharmaceutical industry now admits that investing in “advocacy groups” is an efficient tool for driving long-term support of drug brands—perhaps even more effective than direct-to-consumer marketing.[2] The advisory board of DBSA shows why.
Psychiatrist Jan A. Fawcett, M.D. helped found NDMDA and has been on its Scientific Advisory Council since then, while also conducting a 19-year study on depression for NIMH. Like many of the DBSA advisory board members, Fawcett is connected to other pharmaceutical company funded front groups, including the National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression (NARSAD)[3] and he has been president of the American Suicide Foundation (nowAmerican Foundation for Suicide Prevention).[4] He is with the Department of Psychiatry of the University of New Mexico School of Medicine, and is Chair of the Mood Disorders Work Group ofthe DSM-V (Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) Task Force—a task force whose members have come under scrutiny for their financial ties to drug companies.[5]
His financial disclosure includes: Abbott Laboratories, Alphapharm, Eli Lilly, Wyeth, Merck (Merck Manual, and has a commercial relationship with the company) and has been an expert witness in cases involving pharmaceutical companies.[6]
- The group received $37,510 from Lilly in 2007 and $20,000 in 2008.[7]
- DBSA’s 2007 Annual Report shows it received between $150,000 and $499,000 from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and Wyeth. Abbott, Cyberonics, Lilly, Forest, Glaxo, Organon, and Otsuka American Pharmaceuticals gave between $10,000 and $149,999.[8]
- The report also notes that a “First-ever DBSA Hope Award” for lifetime achievement was presented to Frederick Goodwin, former NIMH Director (1981-88) and also under Senate investigation for undisclosed pharmaceutical company funding.[9]
- Its websites provides a list of medications and drug companies to contact for medication information, while its 2009 conference was supported by Eli Lilly and AstraZeneca’s disease-mongering exhibit, “The Bipolar Journey.”[10]
The DBSA describes itself as “the leading patient-directed national organization” but its 67-member scientific “advisory” board defies this.[11]
A cursory review of the board finds only a handful of members without conflicts of interest. In a brief overview, the following shows the DSBA’s incestuous relationship between government agencies like NIMH and the FDA, the APA, and the pharmaceutical companies making psychotropic drugs or devices such as the electrode brain implantation to supposedly treat “depression.”
- The board includes seven psychiatrists under Senate Finance Committee investigation over their conflicts of interest with the pharmaceutical company, failing to declare nearly $11.7 million between them to universities and agencies with whom they worked and required such disclosure.[12] These are Joseph Biederman, Frederick Goodwin, Martin Keller, Charles B. Nemeroff, A. John Rush, Alan F. Schatzbergand Karen Wagner.[13]
- At least four members were on the DSM-IV Review Panels—exposed in 2006 for its members’ undisclosed ties to the pharmaceutical industry. 100% of the members of the task forces deciding upon which “bipolar” disorders, depression, and psychosis disorders should be included in the DSM-IV had received drug company funding. Another DBSA member co-wrote an entire chapter (43) of DSM-IV. At least four of the DBSA advisory board members sit on the DSM-V Review, including David Kupfer, its chair.
- At least a dozen of the board members are former NIMH officials or sat on NIMH Committees. Other board members have been affiliated with other government agencies, often in research, including: Veteran Affairs, US Army, Dept. of Defense, US Public Health Service and the FDA psychopharmaceutical advisory committees. Dr. Edward Scolnick served as a member of the FDA Science Board from 2000 to 2002, while Dr. Robert Post is currently chief of the Biological Psychiatry Branch of NIMH.
- In addition to pharmaceutical company funding, at least 26 of the Board members have received research funds from NIMH, making theirs and the former NIMH staffs’ affiliation with DBSA a very cozy relationship. Lauren B. Marangell, M.D. is co-director of the NIMH Bipolar Trials Network.
- At least three of the board members are former or current employees of pharmaceutical companies: Dr. Lauren B. Marangell is a “Distinguished Lilly Scholar” at Eli Lilly. Keh-Ming Lin, M.D., MPH, has prior employment with Zeneca Pharmaceuticals.[14] From 1982 to 2003, Edward Scolnick served in a number of key leadership roles at Merck Research Laboratories, is its president emeritus and was chief scientist during the Vioxx scandal (anti-inflammatory drug withdrawn from the market because it caused heart attacks—which Merck was aware of but did not publicly disclose).[15]
- Four of the DBSA advisors were authors of the controversial GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) study 329 that covered up adverse effects of the drug on children: Neal Ryan,Barbara Geller, Martin Keller and Karen Wagner (the latter two investigated by the Senate Finance Committee for undisclosed pharmaceutical company funding). Children suffered serious adverse reactions, including self-harm—mostly cutting; aggression—violent to others; and suicidal thoughts and actions and suicide attempts. Almost 8% of the children had to be hospitalized as a result.[16] Not one of the authors who lent their names to this study have come forth to explain their deception.[17] Study 329 was cited in a New York case where GSK was charged with “repeated and persistent fraud” in suppressing research on paroxetine (Paxil) that had shown increased risk of suicidal thoughts and actions in children taking it. On June 3, 2004 GSK paid $2.5 million to settle the lawsuit.[18]
- Another member, David Dunner, of the University of Washington’s Department of Psychiatry admitted he “ghostwrote” an article about Paxil that appeared in the March 1995 issue of the journal European Neuropsychopharmacology on behalf of GSK and concluded that the antidepressant was less likely to lead to suicidal thoughts than the older antidepressant imipramine or a placebo (sugar pill). However, Dunner had never looked at any of the data yet was still listed as an “author” of the article.
- At least 9 DBSA advisory board members have stock or equity in or helped found pharmaceutical drug or device/development companies, including Alan Schatzberg(founded and has stocks/equity in Corcept Therapeutics,“ an emerging pharmaceutical company.”) Corcept’s scientific advisors include DBSA advisors: Doctors Alan Schatzberg, Ned H. Kalin (stockholder), and Ranga R. Krishnan. Other DBSAadvisory board members that list Corcept in their financial disclosures include: doctorsPedro L. Delgado, Charles Nemeroff (stockholder), David Rubinow (stockholder), and David J. Kupfer, Chair of the DSM-V Task Force.
- More than 10 of the DBSA advisory members are affiliated with Cyberonics, a medical device company that patented VNS (Vegas Nerve Stimulation), a “Clock Work Orange” procedure (costing $15,000- $25,000) and involving implanting electrodes in the brain that send electrical pulses through the brain to “treat” depression. Of these members, at least 3 psychiatrists are steeped in controversy over a study of VNS and its publication in Neuropsychopharmacology when they failed to disclose their financial ties to Cyberonics: A. John Rush, Dennis Charney and Charles Nemeroff. Nemeroff resigned as editor of the journal after he published the paper without disclosing that eight of nine authors–including himself–had financial ties to Cyberonics. Cyberonics also published data in Biological Psychiatry, the editor of which is Charney.[19] In 2006, NAMI—which also has Charney as an advisor—became a corporate partner with Cyberonics, which gave it $75,000 for its “Campaign for the Mind of America.”[20]
- Charney holds a patent in the drug ketamine.[21] On its website DBSA makes a point of claiming that neither it or its advisors and consultants “endorse or recommend the use of any specific treatment or medication,” but then advertises for readers to participate in a clinical drug trial of ketamine.[22]
- At least 6 of the DBSA advisors were researchers and co-authors of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ACNP)-funded study published in January 2004 that found that SSRI antidepressants did not increase the risk of suicide in children and adolescents. ANCP is an organization of psychiatrists with significant financial support from the manufacturers of psychotropic drugs. The authors included: doctorsJan Fawcett (founder of DBSA), Frederick Goodwin, Karen Wagner (Paxil study 329 above), Neal Ryan (Paxil study 329), David Shaffer (invented “TeenScreen” to identify and label teens as depressed) and J. John Mann. Their findings were in stark contrast to the 2003 UK drug regulatory agency warning that there was a serious risk that antidepressants could cause suicide in those younger than 18 (as the FDA confirmed in October 2004 with a black box warning).[23] Mann, Co-Chair of an ACNP Task Force, painted an alarmingly inaccurate picture, stating: “The evidence linking SSRIs to suicide is weak.” Added Mann, “…SSRIs do not cause suicide in youth with depression.” [24] Mann has been a consultant for two of the biggest antidepressant makers: GSK and Pfizer and is also an advisor to Eli Lilly and Lundbeck.[25] Mann has also been a defense expert witness for Pfizer and GSK in litigation related to SSRIs. He is consistently relied upon by the companies as a spokesperson to counter the claims that SSRIs cause suicide.[26]
- Two of the advisors helped developed the Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP) psychiatric drug program invented by drug companies for Texas to force doctors to prescribe the most expensive psychotropic drugs: A. John Rush and Karen Wagner. Another member, Trisha Suppes, M.D., Ph.D, was Director of the Bipolar Disorder Module for the Texas Implementation of Medication Algorithms (TIMA)—considered “Phase 4” of TMAP. “The roll-out of TIMA has begun with the training of physicians and support personnel in algorithm implementation,” the TIMA manual for physicians states.[27]
- About 6 of the DBSA advisory members helped develop the so-called “Mood Disorder Questionnaire” in 2000 to screen people for “bipolar” or “mood disorders.” These include: Robert M.A. Hirschfeld, Joseph R. Calabrese, Paul E. Keck, Robert M. Post, Gary S. Sachs (a principle investigator in NIMH bipolar research), and John M. Zajecka, along with Lydia Lewis, former president of DBSA, and Laurie Flynn, head of NAMI (now over Columbia University’s TeenScreen). The subjective questionnaire could land anyone with a bipolar label with such questions as: Has there ever been a period of time when you were not your usual self and you were so irritable that you shouted at people or started fights or arguments? You felt much more self-confident than usual? You got much less sleep than usual and found you didn’t really miss it?[28]
- Columbia University’s Dr. David Shaffer, who invented the TeenScreen questionnaire now being foisted off on teenagers to label them as depressed (to get them on antidepressants) is also on the advisory board of DBSA.
- Add to this the fact that the advisory board members cross over to other pharmaceutical company funded groups, including at least 6 affiliated with or having been awarded by NAMI; more than a dozen are recipients of NARSAD awards, research funds or are on its scientific advisory board, and at least 11 are on the advisory board of or have been awarded by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention—all groups that rely substantially on drug company funding.
Government agencies such as NIMH, FDA and NIH should not have its officers or employee researchers sitting on the Boards or as advisors to groups such as DBSA.
Thank You CCHR.