President Trump vs Big Pharma

President Trump’s order to sue Big Pharma for its role in the opioid epidemic could potentially have spin-off effects in the area of antidepressants.  If pharmaceutical companies begin to be sued in earnest for inappropriate prescriptions, then they will stop knowingly getting their psychiatric and GP accomplices to carelessly prescribe antidepressants.  Antidepressants kill 40,000 people a year.

Trump is also pushing for a major decrease in drug prices.  That also is cause for some optimism as it will reduce the amount that Big Pharma lobbyists can spend ‘influencing’ the votes of members of Congress.

So far, the ‘get Big Pharma’ story has been all talk, but word is that it is about to start in the real world.  And, importantly, that it has bipartisan support.

For the first time in the many years that I have been blogging here, I am cautiously optimistic that things are going to begin to move in a better direction.

I like this President more and more as time goes on.  He is willing to tread on toes that others not afford to.  He is also, quite obviously, a long way from the bigoted racist that the hysterical media are trying to portray him as.

If Trump is successful, Big Pharma’s massive influence (paid ads) over the mainstream media will also be curtailed.

Exciting times – maybe.

A Box of Frogs

With regard to the previous post…

“She was a box of frogs, absolutely nuts.” (here)

Claire Wilkinson – Zholia Alemi’s secretary

No wonder that she was able to successfully pass herself off as a psychiatrist.

Zholia Alemi – Poster Child for Psychiatry

Zholia Alemi – Poster Child for Psychiatry

The idea of a fake engineer holding down a job without someone spotting that they hadn’t got a clue what they were talking about are non-existent.  Bridges would fall down.  Competence can be objectively judged.

It’s different for psychiatry.  Anyone can psycho-babble and pretend to be helping people by counseling them.

When bridges fall down we know that the engineer stuffed up.  When lives fall down, we should know that the psychiatrist stuffed up.

Or, maybe, we should know that psychiatry is a fake science and that they have never helped anyone, except themselves.

Krazy for Killing


No, I’m not recommending this article, except as a prime example of how someone can confuse the problem with the solution.  He notes that the mass shooters were either taking antidepressants or were trying to get off them.  He comes to the conclusion that more antidepressants should be forced on people who show signs of ‘mental illness’.

Since the Texas Tower Massacre in 1966, which came just after antidepressants were first marketed, the problem resulting from the ingestion of psychiatric drugs has been obvious to Blind Freddy.

The rise in the number of mass shootings parallels the rise in the ever-greater distribution of these mind-twisting, psychoactive, psychiatric drugs.

Force people to take them, knowing the death toll that they have already caused?

I do wonder whether this is just incredibly poor judgement, as in an inability to look at something clearly and logically, or whether the article was paid for by Big Pharma.

Jacksonville Gunman David Katz

This will be no surprise to anyone who has been paying attention.  Of course he was on psych drugs – ‘medication’ as they profitably call it.

“Alleged Jacksonville gunman David Katz suffered from depression at age 15 and received treatment, including four months at a wilderness camp for troubled teens and psychiatric medication, according to reports.”

Read it all here…

American Psychiatric Association Adds ‘Obsessive Categorization Of Mental Conditions’ To ‘DSM-5′

WASHINGTON—As part of their ongoing mission to keep their classifications updated with the most recent available findings, the American Psychiatric Association announced Thursday the supplemental addition of “Obsessive Categorization of Mental Conditions” to the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders.

Breaking news from The Onion.  Read it all here.


The Scandal of Norway’s Child Protection Services

It was a winter’s day, some years ago, when two child welfare specialists – a female psychologist and a male psychiatrist – knocked on the door of a small modern wooden house on the edge of the Norwegian capital, Oslo.

A lively little girl opened the door and greeted the strangers warmly.

But the girl’s mother, Cecilie – who understood the purpose of their visit – was much less pleased to see them.

“I was very scared. I didn’t want them in my house in the first place,” she says, remembering that day.

“I was really nervous that they will find something wrong. I know this is how the Child Protection Services take away children.”

The experts had been appointed to write a report for a family court hearing which would decide the little girl’s future.

Their visit followed years of concern by the Child Protection Service that Cecilie – a single mother – wasn’t looking after her daughter properly, and had rejected offers of help.

That day, she was right to be nervous.

The experts were highly critical of what they observed at her home.

They wrote in their report that “there was no natural flow to the interaction” between mother and daughter.

They said Cecilie struggled to keep the house in order. And they commented on other details that Cecilie believes they misinterpreted.

“Everything is twisted in a negative way,” she says.

“This was not so long after Christmas, and in the local store I had found some gingerbread which they were selling really cheap, for one Norwegian krone. So I bought it just for fun, so that my daughter and I could make some gingerbread men together as an activity.

“But apparently they thought my financial situation was very bad, because I had bought it after Christmas… How can you say a person is poor just because they buy cheap gingerbread?”

“When I saw the report, I was so devastated. It was just all this negativity – negative, negative, negative. There was nothing positive at all.”

The experts’ report – based on information from many health and childcare professionals as well as their own observations – concluded that the little girl’s “development would be limited” if she remained with her mother.

The report said: “This is because the mother does not recognise her daughter’s basic needs and does not perceive the mental harm she may have suffered” while in her mother’s care.

Since then, Cecilie – a lean, anxious-looking, blonde woman now in her 50s – has only seen her daughter seven times.

“I have not been able to follow her development,” she says. “I just lost my daughter’s childhood. I don’t expect really to see her until she’s an adult.”

The recommendation to put the girl into long-term foster care was approved at Oslo District Court. The report’s co-authors attended as witnesses.

Fast forward to April this year, and one of those two experts – the male psychiatrist – reappeared in the same courthouse.

This time, though, he wasn’t in the witness stand.

He was in the dock.

He was sentenced to 22 months in jail – after admitting he had downloaded nearly 200,000 images, and more than 12,000 videos, showing the sexual abuse or sexualisation of children.

The court heard that some appeared to show infants being raped.

Norwegian police were initially tipped off that the man was downloading illegal child abuse images in 2015.

But it wasn’t until early 2017 – a year and a half later – that they investigated and then arrested him.

Read the full report here – if you have the stomach for it.