MORE ON FASCIST ATROCITIES BY PSYCHIATRY AND BY ITS WILFUL STATE PRACTITIONERS by Justice Lover
In the chapter Conclusions of his book, The Myth of Mental Illness (Paladin, 1972) , Prof. Thomas Szasz , MD (professor of psychiatry) states as as follows :
"It is customary to define psychiatry as a medical specialty concerned with the study, diagnosis, and treatment of mental illness. This is a worthless and misleading definition. Mental illness is a myth. Psychiatrists are not concerned with mental illnesses and their treatment. In actual practice they deal with personal,social, and ethical problems in living."
Also in his book, Schizophrenia - The Sacred Symbol of Psychiatry, the same author states that "There is, in short, no such thing as schizophrenia" (Syracuse University Press, 1988, p. 191).
Another American veteran psychiatrist,Dr. Peter Breggin , in his book TOXIC PSYCHIATRY (HarperCollins,London,1993) describes psychiatry at p. 453 as follows :
"...Organised psychiatry is big business more than it is a profession. As a big business, managed by APA and NIMH, it developes media relationships, hires PR firms, developes its medical image, holds press conferences to publicise its products, lobbies on behalf of its interests, and issues 'scientific reports that protect its members from malpractice suits by lending legitimacy to brain- damaging technologies."
Earlier in the same book, at page 451 Breggin describes psychiatry and its partners as follows :
"What we have been examining is a giant combine similar to the military-industrial complex and involving the psychiatric profession (APA), government (NIMH and FDA), private industry (drug companies and health insurers), education (medical schools),and organisations representing the parents of patients (NAMI and other family groups)."
Another American psychiatrist, Dr. David Kaiser, MD ,in an article titled, NOT BY CHEMICALS ALONE: A HARD LOOK AT "PSYCHIATRIC MEDICINE", http://myweb.rust.net/~norman/kaiser.html
states this about psychiatry :
"It has occurred to me with forcible irony that psychiatry has quite literally lost its mind, and along withit the minds of the patients they are presumably supposed to care for."
Another American psychiatrist, Joseph Glenmullen, M.D., clinical instructor in psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, in his book Prozac Backlash (Simon & Schuster, New York, 2000), pages 192-193, page 196, and page 198, points out that the psychiatric dogma is based on speculations rather than on scientific evidence, as follows :
"Psychiatry is unique among medical specialties in that... We do not yet have proof either of the cause or the physiology for any psychiatric diagnosis. ... In recent decades, we have had no shortage of alleged biochemical imbalances for psychiatric conditions. Diligent though these attempts have been, not one has been proven. Quite the contrary. In every instance where such an imbalance was thought to have been found, it was later proven false. ... No claim of a gene for a psychiatric condition has stood the test of time, in spite of popular misinformation."
A British psychiatrist, and psychiatry lecturer, Dr. Joanna Moncrieff, M.D. in her article titled,
Psychiatric Imperialism: The Medicalisation of Modern Living,
http://www.academyanalyticarts.org/moncrieff.htm , investigated the political-social aspect of psychiatry, and reached the following conclusion :
"The institution of psychiatry grew up in the 19th century during the emergence and consolidation of industrial capitalism. Its function was to deal with abnormal and bizarre behaviour which, without breaking the law, did not comply with the demands of the new social and economic order. Its association with medicine concealed this political function of social control by endowing it with the objectivity and neutrality of science. The medical model of mental disorder has served ever since to obscure the social processes that produce and define deviance by locating problems in individual biology. This obfuscation lends itself to the perpetuation of the established order by side-stepping the challenge that is implicit in deviant behaviour and thereby undermining a source of criticism and opposition."
The upshot of this brief survey of views of people,who are well qualified to accurately define and describe psychiatry, is that psychiatry is not merely useless as a medical service to people, it is actually harmful, and even more so in its coercive "treatments". Yet, it is not merely quackery which has been legitimised by the state authorities, because its real function is to serve big business, the rulers of the state, and first and foremost serve Big Pharma, the senoir partner of psychiatry. Which explains why the state's shrinks feel so safe in their arrogant exercise of their jobs, so safe that they could not care less about the suffering of the victims of their tortures and atrocities. The states laws are protecting them, big business is promoting them, so why bother about the millions of human lives ruined or killed by psychiatric "treatment " ?
This is fascism at its most obvious form as the shrinks exercise the terrorist dictatorship of big business, of which psychiatry has become a partner, an accomplice and an executioner !
ABOLISH PSYCHIATRY NOW !
Saturday, February 17, 2007
Friday, February 16, 2007
The TeenScreen Trap
by Elyse Van Breemen
http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2007/02/13/p14448
"Will you walk into my parlor?" said the Spider to the Fly, 'tis the prettiest little parlor that ever you did spy." In Mary Howitt's classic poem of 1821, the spider leads the unsuspecting fly to its death by clever deception. Today, children as young as nine are led into a web of invasive tests, psychiatric treatment and a lifetime of drugs by the clever deception known as TeenScreen mental health screening.
From the outside, TeenScreen's parlor may look safe, even pretty. But inside, horrors await. Invasive and leading questions make any child wonder whether he can even trust himself. TeenScreen will not voluntarily give these questions to anyone, even parents, but you can find the actual survey at:
http://libertycoalition.net/cognitive-liberty/psychiatry-gone-wild-teenscreen-documents-exposed
http://ahrp.blogspot.com/2007/01/almost-50-of-teens-screened-for-mental.html
Unsuspecting parents are not told what will happen to their children once in the trap. Results can include being "branded" for life with a "mental illness", prescriptions to mind-altering psychiatric drugs, placement in "special education classes" and more. In some states the parents may be charged with neglect or have their children taken away if they refuse to give them drugs to control behavior.
"The way into my parlor is up a winding stair," the poem's spider says. Teen Screen's stair winds through a myriad of curious "mental illness labels" from the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fourth Edition (DSM- IV). The TeenScreen survey asks leading questions designed to mimic the list of symptoms for Social Phobia, Panic, Generalized Anxiety, Obsessive Compulsive, Depression, Alcohol Abuse, Marijuana Abuse, and Other Substance Abuse.
Through the DSM-IV normal reactions to life are re-labeled as symptoms of "mental illness". Using the DSM criteria, a psychologist, psychiatrist or medical doctor may determine that the child has "Sibling Rivalry Disorder", "Conduct Disorder", "Written Expression Disorder", or the all-encompassing, "Phase of Life Problem Disorder." Of course, anyone who doesn't want treatment has a "Noncompliance with Treatment Disorder."
Teen Screen is a misrepresentation. It purports to locate and handle loss of self esteem which could lead to suicide; yet it burdens the children with labels of mental illness that confirm and excuse any lack of ability to cope with life. Tested and labeled, they feel worse about themselves.
15 year old Chelsea Rhoades' experience with TeenScreen is a case in point. Unbeknownst to her parents, she spent 10 minutes answering questions such as: "Have you often felt very nervous when you've had to do things in front of people?" "Has there been a time when you felt you couldn't do anything well or that you weren't as good-looking or as smart as other people?" and "Has there been a time when nothing was fun for you and you just weren't interested in anything?"
Chelsea then waited in the hall and was pulled over to talk with a mental health center employee who told her she had two mental health problems. When asked on the test if she felt cut off from friends, she answered "yes." For this she was deemed to have a "Social Anxiety Disorder." However, the reason she felt cut off is that her parents did not allow her to go out on school nights.
When asked on the test "Do you find yourself repeatedly doing something for which you have little or no control over?" she answered "yes." Because of that answer, it was decided she had "Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder." The "something she had no control over" was having to clean house and do her daily chores.
In defense of her parental rights, the prestigious Rutherford Foundation filed a lawsuit against the school system and the "mental health" clinic that intended to profit from screened children. Chelsea's mother, Teresa Rhoades, is circulating a petition against Teen Screen: http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html
Chelsea's misadventures with TeenScreen show very well that the test is flawed. Anyone can see that there is not one positive question on the test! There are no questions like: When you feel down and out, do you try to find something interesting or uplifting to do? Do you like to help people? Are there things you dream of doing? Do you think for yourself? Are there moments when you feel it is wonderful to be alive?
The whole test is a complete "downer," with no chance to weigh the positive side of the person. Over and over a child is pounded with questions like: "Have you tried to kill yourself in the last year? Are you still thinking of killing yourself? Have you thought seriously about killing yourself? Have you often thought about killing yourself? Have you ever tried to kill yourself?"
Like the parent who continually tells their child how terrible, inadequate and wrong he or she is, TeenScreen only "tests" the negative side. We've all observed this fact: the negative parent usually has a negative child. In the same way, the results of the negative Teen Screen are too often negative, and FALSE.
Teen Screen did not originate from some altruistic group bent on helping people. It has strong ties to the psychiatric and pharmaceutical industry. It is the brainchild of psychiatrist David Shaffer, a paid consultant for pharmaceutical companies Hoffman la Roche, Wyeth, Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline.
Shaffer is also the director of the Division of Child Psychiatry at the New York State Psychiatric Institute. Laurie Flynn, the current director of TeenScreen, is the former director of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), a controversial organization because of the extensive funding it receives from pharmaceutical giants such as Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline and Eli Lilly.
Teen Screen did not come from an altruistic need, for teen suicide is, in fact, going down. The last available study showed it accounted for only 0.0008% of the total U. S. teen population, falling by 25 percent in the last decade.
Teen Screen clearly springs from an all-consuming desire to line psychiatric and pharmaceutical pockets.
When TeenScreen hit one Colorado school system, 71% of those tested "positive" and were referred for further evaluation. Once children enter the "mental health" system, nine out of ten of them who see a psychiatrist are given psychotropic drugs, according to a study.
The spider only pretended he was helping the fly; he merely meant to entrap, maim and kill to support his own hunger. TeenScreen does not help but only feeds the psycho-pharmaceutical industry. The chilling final line of Mary Howitt's poem gives valuable advice to parents about TeenScreen, "Unto an evil counselor, close heart and ear and eye, And take a lesson from this tale, of the Spider and the Fly."
Readers, please read and sign this petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html
(Emphasis added by Justice Lover).
February 13, 2007 Elyse Van Breemen is an author and activist, currently working on a book on psychiatric abuse. If you have a personal story to tell, especially involving children, please contact her at psychabuse@mailmight.com
Saturday, February 10, 2007
Justice Lover recommends also :
http://nocrush.blogspot.com/
http://1stpartmedfascism.blogspot.com/
http://2ndmedfascism.blogspot.com/
THE KILLING OF A 4 YEARS OLD GIRL BY HER SHRINK/BIG PHARMA !
Freedom Center wrote:
Hey y'all,
This is a letter to the editor I sent to a few papers in response to reading an AP article that Aby showed me yesterday.
The article is about a four year old girl who was diagnosed with ADHD and bipolar disorder who taking Clonadine and something for bipolar as well (as was her entire family). DSS failed to investigate the case prior to her death despite warnings and the dr. insisted that the meds were appropriate.
In the news for a while it's been big who to blame--- the parents? dss? the doctor? the pharmacist?--- i decided to put the focus back where i think it in someways belongs: the drugs and the companies who make them. (Not that any of the above culprits couldn't have played a significant role in preventing this).
Here's my letter, feedback welcome---also please send it to anyone or any paper or anything you think will pick it up.
peace-
Mollie
As a member of western Mass.-based mental health organization, the Freedom Center, I am appalled to hear about the case of 4 year-old Rebecca Riley dying from an overdose of psychiatric drugs. This is yet another example that psychiatric drug use for children is extremely dangerous and can have lethal consequences.
For years, members of the Freedom Center and otherpsychiatric abuse survivor organizations have done popular education, told their personal stories, and pleaded with the public to understand the type of consequences these drugs can have.
The larger psychiatric abuse survivor movement has won lawsuits forcing the FDA to put black box warnings on the links between these SSRIs (suchas Prozac) and suiciality, they have exposed pharmaceutical drug company foreknowledge about the way certain antipsychotics cause diabetes and obesity, and they helped promote doctors and researchers to encourage congress to investigate the toxic effect of psychiatric amphetamines.
In European countries many of these psychiatric drugs are banned for use with children. How many overdoses, suicides, and acts of violence have to occur in the United States for the public to understand that we need such bans here as well?
Mollie Hurter,
Freedom Center
208 Park St. Easthampton,
Ma413-527-0919(Emphasis added by Justice Lover)
http://nocrush.blogspot.com/
http://1stpartmedfascism.blogspot.com/
http://2ndmedfascism.blogspot.com/
THE KILLING OF A 4 YEARS OLD GIRL BY HER SHRINK/BIG PHARMA !
Freedom Center
Hey y'all,
This is a letter to the editor I sent to a few papers in response to reading an AP article that Aby showed me yesterday.
The article is about a four year old girl who was diagnosed with ADHD and bipolar disorder who taking Clonadine and something for bipolar as well (as was her entire family). DSS failed to investigate the case prior to her death despite warnings and the dr. insisted that the meds were appropriate.
In the news for a while it's been big who to blame--- the parents? dss? the doctor? the pharmacist?--- i decided to put the focus back where i think it in someways belongs: the drugs and the companies who make them. (Not that any of the above culprits couldn't have played a significant role in preventing this).
Here's my letter, feedback welcome---also please send it to anyone or any paper or anything you think will pick it up.
peace-
Mollie
As a member of western Mass.-based mental health organization, the Freedom Center, I am appalled to hear about the case of 4 year-old Rebecca Riley dying from an overdose of psychiatric drugs. This is yet another example that psychiatric drug use for children is extremely dangerous and can have lethal consequences.
For years, members of the Freedom Center and otherpsychiatric abuse survivor organizations have done popular education, told their personal stories, and pleaded with the public to understand the type of consequences these drugs can have.
The larger psychiatric abuse survivor movement has won lawsuits forcing the FDA to put black box warnings on the links between these SSRIs (suchas Prozac) and suiciality, they have exposed pharmaceutical drug company foreknowledge about the way certain antipsychotics cause diabetes and obesity, and they helped promote doctors and researchers to encourage congress to investigate the toxic effect of psychiatric amphetamines.
In European countries many of these psychiatric drugs are banned for use with children. How many overdoses, suicides, and acts of violence have to occur in the United States for the public to understand that we need such bans here as well?
Mollie Hurter,
Freedom Center
208 Park St. Easthampton,
Ma413-527-0919(Emphasis added by Justice Lover)
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
Latest Schools that have sent TeenScreen packing
emailed to me by Parents Against TeenScreen (USA)
The "bites the dust" page is growing with schools and entire school districts: http://www.teenscreen-locations.com/noteenscreen.htm
TeenScreen is secretive. Some sites have been found and are listed on the above website. Your assistance is needed to smoke out the rest.
Latest Schools that have sent TeenScreen packing:
INDIANA
Penn High school
Mishawaka Indiana, This is the school district that was sued in federal court by Teresa and Michael Rhoades because their child was screened and diagnosed with two mental disorders without parental consent. "We discontinued TeenScreen at Penn High school because we had a very low response rate from parents when we requested written permission to administer the screening to students." (PAT = Parents Against TeenScreen)
Lawrenceburg High School
"The school corporation is experiencing severe budget problems at this time. As a result, our guidance department has lost staff resulting in not offering the Teen Screen program this year."
NEVADA
Clark County School District, Las Vegas, NV
"Green Valley High School no longer participates in the TeenScreen Program, nor does the school plan to do so in the future."
WEST VIRGINIA
East Fairmont Jr. High
"Computer issues were a problem."
Courtesy of the creative guys at http://www.newstarget.com/
18,351 Total Signatures http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html
Check out the comments! (Emphasis added by Justice Lover)
emailed to me by Parents Against TeenScreen (USA)
The "bites the dust" page is growing with schools and entire school districts: http://www.teenscreen-locations.com/noteenscreen.htm
TeenScreen is secretive. Some sites have been found and are listed on the above website. Your assistance is needed to smoke out the rest.
Latest Schools that have sent TeenScreen packing:
INDIANA
Penn High school
Mishawaka Indiana, This is the school district that was sued in federal court by Teresa and Michael Rhoades because their child was screened and diagnosed with two mental disorders without parental consent. "We discontinued TeenScreen at Penn High school because we had a very low response rate from parents when we requested written permission to administer the screening to students." (PAT = Parents Against TeenScreen)
Lawrenceburg High School
"The school corporation is experiencing severe budget problems at this time. As a result, our guidance department has lost staff resulting in not offering the Teen Screen program this year."
NEVADA
Clark County School District, Las Vegas, NV
"Green Valley High School no longer participates in the TeenScreen Program, nor does the school plan to do so in the future."
WEST VIRGINIA
East Fairmont Jr. High
"Computer issues were a problem."
Courtesy of the creative guys at http://www.newstarget.com/
18,351 Total Signatures http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html
Check out the comments! (Emphasis added by Justice Lover)
Saturday, February 3, 2007
THE POISONS WHICH BIG PHARMA/SHRINKS WRONGLY CALL "MEDICATIONS",
AND THE SHRINKS FORCE PATIENTS TO SWALLOW THEM DAILY
by Justice Lover
The following article by investigative journalist, EVELYN PRINGLE, was published over the weekend (3-4 February,2007) by counterpunch.com.
She opens her article : "The on-going legal battle over the disclosure of secret Eli Lilly documents that reveal the serious health risks associated with Zyprexa and the company's off-label promotion of the drug involves a matter of grave public concern."
It sure is of grave concern to the public, as it involves serious crimes against humanity by Big Pharma, and by its accomplice psychiatrists (as well as the FDA and the courts). Moreover, the Zyprexa scandal is merely the very tip of the horrendous iceberg.
There are neuroleptics ("anti-psychotic" drugs) which are even more dangerous,and more harmful than Zyperxa. Thus is the case of Clozapine ,which the psychiatric profession (here in Australia at least) has been using profusely ( mostly by force, under CTO) on patients labelled as "schizophrenics". This is despite the sudden death of at least half a dozen patients who were forced to swallow this poison here in Australia ( the known cases of sudden deaths occured in Queensland and in Tasmania).
The well proven harmfull effects of Clozapine include all those of Zyperxa plus the following deadly effects ( see : http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic3/clozapine.htm ). Clozapine causes the deadly Agranulocytosis, seizures, Myocarditis,Orthostatic Hypotension, severe constipation, and Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome. According to David Healy, a British psychiatrist ,expert on psychiatric drugs, "Olanzapine and clozapine also raise lipid levels and blood sugar levels leading to diabetes. In the case of clozapine, there is an increased likelihood of epileptic convulsions" (Psychiatric Drugs Explained,at page 12). It also causes the over production of saliva which severly interfers with the patient's ability to have a minimal restful night sleep, as well as causing confusion and having a generally debilitating effects, so that even if the patient survives the deadly dangers , the patient's daily living turns torture, daily torture !
The main reason why the shrinks like the neuroleptics, and the Clozapine in particular, is that they make the patient docile, easy to manipulate, and "trouble free" for the "treating psychiatrist".
The Clozapine scandal is by far bigger and worse than the Zyperxa scandal !
Here then is the article :
"These Drugs are Poison to Some People"
Zyprexa: the Injury Clock Keeps Ticking Away
by EVELYN PRINGLE
The on-going legal battle over the disclosure of secret Eli Lilly documents that reveal the serious health risks associated with Zyprexa and the company's off-label promotion of the drug involves a matter of grave public concern.
But observers on the sidelines of this courtroom circus say the conduct of the judge in helping Lilly keep documents secret that give the specific details of an illegal marketing scheme that is literally killing people is almost as disturbing as the underlying acts.
The off-label prescribing of Zyprexa has created a public health crisis. According to the New York Times, the secret documents show a pattern of unlawful activities that may have left the 20 million individuals who have taken Zyprexa with incomplete information regarding the side effects of the drug.
Harvard trained psychiatrist, Dr Stefan Kruszewski, reports that Zyprexa increases the risk of obesity, diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular complications, heart attacks and stroke.
Keeping in mind that the FDA says that only between 1% and 10% of adverse events are reported to the agency, a study conducted 5 years ago, in the July 2002, issue of Pharmacotherapy, reviewed the adverse event reports submitted on Zyprexa and found that of the 289 cases of diabetes reported, 225 of the patients were newly diagnosed.
The review also identified 100 Zyprexa patients who had developed ketosis, a serious complication of diabetes, 22 cases of pancreatitis, a life-threatening inflammation of the pancreas, and 23 deaths associated with the drug.
Zyprexa is an antipsychotic approved by the FDA to treat adults with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder only. But doctors are prescribing the drug for conditions, treatment durations, and patient populations for which it was never intended and worst of all it is being widely prescribed for children.
For instance, in February 2006, public health officials in Florida ordered an investigation into why the number of children who are prescribed antipsychotics billed to Medicaid in Florida had nearly doubled in five years, from 9,500 children to almost 18,000.
The lawsuits filed against Lilly to recover the money paid for Zyprexa by state Medicaid programs due to the company's off-label promotion say the drug is being sold for unapproved uses such as anxiety and other mood disorders, sleep disruption, autism, attention deficit disorders, hyperactivity, and dementia.
According to the attorney general of Mississippi, about 10% of Zyprexa patients on Medicaid in that state, have developed diabetes.
In fact, the health problems associated with Zyprexa have become so prevalent, that one class action lawsuit is demanding money to cover the medical monitoring of all patients who took Zyprexa but have not yet been diagnosed with high blood sugar, diabetes, or pancreatitis.
Children on Zyprexa are developing life-long injuries.
At the annual meeting of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry in Washington, DC, on October 20, 2004, researchers from the Johns Hopkins Children's Center reported that atypical antipsychotics were found to trigger insulin resistance in children. The researchers evaluated 11 children who gained significant amounts of weight while taking the drugs.
Weight gain is a known risk factor that contributes to insulin resistance. Insulin is produced by the pancreas to help cells absorb glucose and provide energy. When resistance occurs, the pancreas tries to keep up with the demand by producing more insulin until it eventually cannot keep up, and excess glucose builds up in the bloodstream which can increase the risk of type-2 diabetes, heart disease, and stroke.
All six children in the John Hopkins study who were on moderate or high doses of an antipsychotic developed symptoms of insulin resistance, and three of the 5 children on low doses did as well.
The study's lead author, Dr Mark Riddle, director of the division of child and adolescent psychiatry at the Center, said, "The insulin resistance seen in these children was greater than what would be expected from weight gain alone, suggesting there is a factor distinct from excess weight that directly induces insulin resistance."
Experts say Zyprexa is poison for some people.
According to Dr Louis Caplan, Professor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School, there is overuse of antipsychotics in patients admitted to hospitals. "These drugs," he said, "are often given in high doses to very sick patients in intensive care units or on medical and surgical units," in the February 21, 2006, journal Neurology.
"They cause symptoms and neurological dysfunctions that are a common reason for neurological consultations in the hospital," Dr Caplan warns.
"Old sick people with abnormal brains do not tolerate these drugs well," he says. "In patients with Lewy-body disease and some Parkinsonian syndromes, their use is a disaster, setting patients back for weeks," he warns.
When the FDA approves a drug, it also approves the labeling which explains the manner in which the drug is to be prescribed. While doctors may prescribe drugs as they see fit, its illegal for drug companies to promote drugs for uses outside the labeling.
However, as vividly evidenced here, drug makers do it and get away with it all the time and the leaked Lilly documents prove that the US court system is aiding and abetting drug companies in hiding their illegal marketing schemes.
For instance, in one article, the Times quotes a sealed document that served as a script for a company meeting in 2001, where a Mr Bandick praised sales representatives for the number of new Zyprexa prescriptions they got doctors to write. According to the script, more than 100 representatives convinced doctors to write at least 16 extra prescriptions.
The legal battle over the documents began in December 2006, when Dr David Egilman, provided the documents to Alaskan attorney, Jim Gottstein, and Mr Gottstein turned them over to Alex Berenson, a reporter for the New York Times.
Dr Egilman first learned about Lilly's illegal conduct when he reviewed the documents a few years back as an expert witness in the Zyprexa litigation. However, when Lilly was successful in the settling the cases out of court, Dr Egilman was forcibly silenced because the court allowed Lilly to continue to keep the documents hidden with a protective order.
As soon as the articles began to appear in the New York Times, describing an off-label marketing scheme called, "Viva Zyprexa," Lilly got a judge to issue a mandatory temporary injunction on December 18, 2006, ordering Mr Gottstein to return the documents and list the names of everyone he disclosed them to or discussed them with.
After he supplied the list, Lilly got the court to issue a second temporary injunction on December 29, 2006, to prohibit the dissemination of the documents by Terrie Gottstein, Jerry Winchester, Dr Peter Breggin, Dr Grace Jackson, Dr David Cohen, Bruce Whittington, Dr Stefan Kruszewski, Laura Ziegler, Judy Chamberlin, Vera Sherav, Robert Whitaker, and Will Hall.
The above list reads like a Big Pharma hit list. It includes about every well-known expert on the side effects of psychiatric drugs in the US, as well as the journalists and authors who have investigated and written most extensively about the misconduct of drug companies when it comes to the off-label promotion of drugs, and specifically Zyprexa.
Conspicuously absent from the injunction is the New York Times and the reporter who actually used the documents when writing five articles on the matter. Most curious is the fact that Lilly has never even asked the court to issue an injunction for the Times.
On January 3, 2007, a hearing was held on a request by Lilly to extend the temporary injunction, and to force Mr Gottstein to appear in New York City for a deposition within 5 days, as a prelude to charging him with civil and criminal contempt of court for publicizing the documents.
As a result of that hearing, several more entities were added to the injunction list including Eric Whalen and his web site at www.joysoup.net; the MindFreedom web site at www.mindfreedom.org, and the Alliance for Human Research Protection (AHRP) web sites at www.ahrp.org and www.ahrp.blogspot.com.
Once again, the Times and Alex Berenson were not added, and in fact, during the hearing, Judge Jack Weinstein said he was not about to issue an injunction against the Times.
By its own estimate in the media, Lilly produced approximately 11 million documents in discovery for Zyprexa litigation thus far, and has designated them all confidential pursuant to Case Management Order 3, a protective order entered on August 9, 2004.
When issuing CMO-3, the court gave Lilly the right to designate documents confidential, as long as Lilly "in good faith" believed that they were. However legal experts say the secret documents at issue here never should have been covered by a protective order.
According to attorneys in the case, in entering CMO-3, the court did not articulate the reasons why a protective order was necessary or set forth any criteria to use when determining whether a document was actually confidential and deserving of protection.
Yet instead of keeping the focus on why the 11 million documents were ever permitted to remain hidden in the first place, Judge Weinstein is allowing Lilly to hammer away at the messengers who gave the documents to the press, after deciding that the information needed to be circulated before more people were injured and killed.
In a January 17, 2007, hearing, Mr Gottstein was asked: "In this particular case involving Zyprexa, at the time you subpoenaed Dr. Egilman, had you the impression that Eli Lilly had deliberately withheld from the public and from physicians adverse side effects of Zyprexa?"
He answered: "Absolutely."
Mr Gottstein was then asked whether it was his impression that there were thousands of cases of harm to people from Zyprexa, while Lilly was in the process of settling cases out of court, and he said yes and that was why he wanted the documents out there "to protect people from this drug."
He had nothing to gain personally by providing the documents the Times. Mr Gottstein testified that he does not represent clients who were injured by Zyprexa for money damages and that his sole interest was protecting patients.
On January 25, 2007, in response to a request for Dr Egilman to appear at a deposition in preparation for Lilly to file civil and criminal contempt of court charges against him, though his attorney, Dr Egilman informed Lilly's legal team that he will refuse to testify under the protection of the Fifth Amendment.
A number of persons restrained by the injunction have obtained attorneys to file briefs with First Amendment arguments including the public's right to know what is in the documents and some people appeared at the last court hearing.
Ms Sharav and Dr Cohen point out in their brief, that they are not ex-employees of Lilly who have stolen trade secrets. They are merely a public health advocate and a professor who seek to share Lilly's own words with the public and they view exposing the information that "Lilly wants so desperately to keep hidden" as their primary public role.
Ms Sharav testified at the January 17, 2007, hearing, and when asked why she was interested in the documents by a Lilly attorney, said because they document the fact that Lilly knew in 2000, that Zyprexa caused diabetes, "from a group of doctors that they hired who told them you have to come clean."
"And instead of warning doctors who are widely prescribing the drug," she testified, "Eli Lilly set about in an aggressive marketing campaign to primary doctors."
"Little children are being given this drug," she said, "Little children are being exposed to horrific diseases that end their lives shorter."
"Now, I consider that a major crime," she stated, "to continue to conceal these facts from the public is I think really not in the public interest. This is a safety issue."
Lilly's attorney asked the court to strike her comments from the record but the request was denied.
Attorney, Alan Milstein, appeared on behalf of Ms Sharav, the AHRP, and Dr Cohen, and toward the end of the hearing noted that in handling the underlying Zypexa litigation, the judge had had occasion to look at the documents in question or at least to read the Times articles and stated: "What is abundantly clear is that they are not trade secrets."
"Lilly in no way fears dissemination of these documents to their competitors, to Merck or to Glaxo," Mr Milstein told Judge Weinstein.
"What Lilly wants to prevent," he said, "is the public at large, the consumers of its products, from seeing these documents and learning the truth about the product that Lilly produces and the way it markets it."
"Documents like that are not confidential and should not be marked confidential," he stated.
At the end of the hearing, the judge instructed the parties to file more briefs and another hearing is scheduled for February 7, 2007, for oral arguments.
In the latest turn of events, right out of the blue, Judge Weinstein issued an order this week with an "invitation" for Mr Berenson to appear in court to give testimony and be cross-examined on whether he participated in a conspiracy with Mr Gottstein and Dr Egilman to violate the original court order that sealed the documents.
In the meantime, while this circus plays out in the courts, every day thousands of doctors and patients are making uninformed decisions on whether to use Zyprexa. And the injury clock is ticking.
Allen Jones, a former fraud investigator in the Pennsylvania Office of Inspector General, states: "My best effort at correlating dollars spent with deaths suggests that people may be dying from side effects at the rate of at least one death for each one million dollars spent on the drug." (Emphasis added by Justice Lover)
Evelyn Pringle is an investigative journalist.
She can be reached at: evelyn-pringle@sbcglobal.net.
AND THE SHRINKS FORCE PATIENTS TO SWALLOW THEM DAILY
by Justice Lover
The following article by investigative journalist, EVELYN PRINGLE, was published over the weekend (3-4 February,2007) by counterpunch.com.
She opens her article : "The on-going legal battle over the disclosure of secret Eli Lilly documents that reveal the serious health risks associated with Zyprexa and the company's off-label promotion of the drug involves a matter of grave public concern."
It sure is of grave concern to the public, as it involves serious crimes against humanity by Big Pharma, and by its accomplice psychiatrists (as well as the FDA and the courts). Moreover, the Zyprexa scandal is merely the very tip of the horrendous iceberg.
There are neuroleptics ("anti-psychotic" drugs) which are even more dangerous,and more harmful than Zyperxa. Thus is the case of Clozapine ,which the psychiatric profession (here in Australia at least) has been using profusely ( mostly by force, under CTO) on patients labelled as "schizophrenics". This is despite the sudden death of at least half a dozen patients who were forced to swallow this poison here in Australia ( the known cases of sudden deaths occured in Queensland and in Tasmania).
The well proven harmfull effects of Clozapine include all those of Zyperxa plus the following deadly effects ( see : http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic3/clozapine.htm ). Clozapine causes the deadly Agranulocytosis, seizures, Myocarditis,Orthostatic Hypotension, severe constipation, and Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome. According to David Healy, a British psychiatrist ,expert on psychiatric drugs, "Olanzapine and clozapine also raise lipid levels and blood sugar levels leading to diabetes. In the case of clozapine, there is an increased likelihood of epileptic convulsions" (Psychiatric Drugs Explained,at page 12). It also causes the over production of saliva which severly interfers with the patient's ability to have a minimal restful night sleep, as well as causing confusion and having a generally debilitating effects, so that even if the patient survives the deadly dangers , the patient's daily living turns torture, daily torture !
The main reason why the shrinks like the neuroleptics, and the Clozapine in particular, is that they make the patient docile, easy to manipulate, and "trouble free" for the "treating psychiatrist".
The Clozapine scandal is by far bigger and worse than the Zyperxa scandal !
Here then is the article :
"These Drugs are Poison to Some People"
Zyprexa: the Injury Clock Keeps Ticking Away
by EVELYN PRINGLE
The on-going legal battle over the disclosure of secret Eli Lilly documents that reveal the serious health risks associated with Zyprexa and the company's off-label promotion of the drug involves a matter of grave public concern.
But observers on the sidelines of this courtroom circus say the conduct of the judge in helping Lilly keep documents secret that give the specific details of an illegal marketing scheme that is literally killing people is almost as disturbing as the underlying acts.
The off-label prescribing of Zyprexa has created a public health crisis. According to the New York Times, the secret documents show a pattern of unlawful activities that may have left the 20 million individuals who have taken Zyprexa with incomplete information regarding the side effects of the drug.
Harvard trained psychiatrist, Dr Stefan Kruszewski, reports that Zyprexa increases the risk of obesity, diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular complications, heart attacks and stroke.
Keeping in mind that the FDA says that only between 1% and 10% of adverse events are reported to the agency, a study conducted 5 years ago, in the July 2002, issue of Pharmacotherapy, reviewed the adverse event reports submitted on Zyprexa and found that of the 289 cases of diabetes reported, 225 of the patients were newly diagnosed.
The review also identified 100 Zyprexa patients who had developed ketosis, a serious complication of diabetes, 22 cases of pancreatitis, a life-threatening inflammation of the pancreas, and 23 deaths associated with the drug.
Zyprexa is an antipsychotic approved by the FDA to treat adults with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder only. But doctors are prescribing the drug for conditions, treatment durations, and patient populations for which it was never intended and worst of all it is being widely prescribed for children.
For instance, in February 2006, public health officials in Florida ordered an investigation into why the number of children who are prescribed antipsychotics billed to Medicaid in Florida had nearly doubled in five years, from 9,500 children to almost 18,000.
The lawsuits filed against Lilly to recover the money paid for Zyprexa by state Medicaid programs due to the company's off-label promotion say the drug is being sold for unapproved uses such as anxiety and other mood disorders, sleep disruption, autism, attention deficit disorders, hyperactivity, and dementia.
According to the attorney general of Mississippi, about 10% of Zyprexa patients on Medicaid in that state, have developed diabetes.
In fact, the health problems associated with Zyprexa have become so prevalent, that one class action lawsuit is demanding money to cover the medical monitoring of all patients who took Zyprexa but have not yet been diagnosed with high blood sugar, diabetes, or pancreatitis.
Children on Zyprexa are developing life-long injuries.
At the annual meeting of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry in Washington, DC, on October 20, 2004, researchers from the Johns Hopkins Children's Center reported that atypical antipsychotics were found to trigger insulin resistance in children. The researchers evaluated 11 children who gained significant amounts of weight while taking the drugs.
Weight gain is a known risk factor that contributes to insulin resistance. Insulin is produced by the pancreas to help cells absorb glucose and provide energy. When resistance occurs, the pancreas tries to keep up with the demand by producing more insulin until it eventually cannot keep up, and excess glucose builds up in the bloodstream which can increase the risk of type-2 diabetes, heart disease, and stroke.
All six children in the John Hopkins study who were on moderate or high doses of an antipsychotic developed symptoms of insulin resistance, and three of the 5 children on low doses did as well.
The study's lead author, Dr Mark Riddle, director of the division of child and adolescent psychiatry at the Center, said, "The insulin resistance seen in these children was greater than what would be expected from weight gain alone, suggesting there is a factor distinct from excess weight that directly induces insulin resistance."
Experts say Zyprexa is poison for some people.
According to Dr Louis Caplan, Professor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School, there is overuse of antipsychotics in patients admitted to hospitals. "These drugs," he said, "are often given in high doses to very sick patients in intensive care units or on medical and surgical units," in the February 21, 2006, journal Neurology.
"They cause symptoms and neurological dysfunctions that are a common reason for neurological consultations in the hospital," Dr Caplan warns.
"Old sick people with abnormal brains do not tolerate these drugs well," he says. "In patients with Lewy-body disease and some Parkinsonian syndromes, their use is a disaster, setting patients back for weeks," he warns.
When the FDA approves a drug, it also approves the labeling which explains the manner in which the drug is to be prescribed. While doctors may prescribe drugs as they see fit, its illegal for drug companies to promote drugs for uses outside the labeling.
However, as vividly evidenced here, drug makers do it and get away with it all the time and the leaked Lilly documents prove that the US court system is aiding and abetting drug companies in hiding their illegal marketing schemes.
For instance, in one article, the Times quotes a sealed document that served as a script for a company meeting in 2001, where a Mr Bandick praised sales representatives for the number of new Zyprexa prescriptions they got doctors to write. According to the script, more than 100 representatives convinced doctors to write at least 16 extra prescriptions.
The legal battle over the documents began in December 2006, when Dr David Egilman, provided the documents to Alaskan attorney, Jim Gottstein, and Mr Gottstein turned them over to Alex Berenson, a reporter for the New York Times.
Dr Egilman first learned about Lilly's illegal conduct when he reviewed the documents a few years back as an expert witness in the Zyprexa litigation. However, when Lilly was successful in the settling the cases out of court, Dr Egilman was forcibly silenced because the court allowed Lilly to continue to keep the documents hidden with a protective order.
As soon as the articles began to appear in the New York Times, describing an off-label marketing scheme called, "Viva Zyprexa," Lilly got a judge to issue a mandatory temporary injunction on December 18, 2006, ordering Mr Gottstein to return the documents and list the names of everyone he disclosed them to or discussed them with.
After he supplied the list, Lilly got the court to issue a second temporary injunction on December 29, 2006, to prohibit the dissemination of the documents by Terrie Gottstein, Jerry Winchester, Dr Peter Breggin, Dr Grace Jackson, Dr David Cohen, Bruce Whittington, Dr Stefan Kruszewski, Laura Ziegler, Judy Chamberlin, Vera Sherav, Robert Whitaker, and Will Hall.
The above list reads like a Big Pharma hit list. It includes about every well-known expert on the side effects of psychiatric drugs in the US, as well as the journalists and authors who have investigated and written most extensively about the misconduct of drug companies when it comes to the off-label promotion of drugs, and specifically Zyprexa.
Conspicuously absent from the injunction is the New York Times and the reporter who actually used the documents when writing five articles on the matter. Most curious is the fact that Lilly has never even asked the court to issue an injunction for the Times.
On January 3, 2007, a hearing was held on a request by Lilly to extend the temporary injunction, and to force Mr Gottstein to appear in New York City for a deposition within 5 days, as a prelude to charging him with civil and criminal contempt of court for publicizing the documents.
As a result of that hearing, several more entities were added to the injunction list including Eric Whalen and his web site at www.joysoup.net; the MindFreedom web site at www.mindfreedom.org, and the Alliance for Human Research Protection (AHRP) web sites at www.ahrp.org and www.ahrp.blogspot.com.
Once again, the Times and Alex Berenson were not added, and in fact, during the hearing, Judge Jack Weinstein said he was not about to issue an injunction against the Times.
By its own estimate in the media, Lilly produced approximately 11 million documents in discovery for Zyprexa litigation thus far, and has designated them all confidential pursuant to Case Management Order 3, a protective order entered on August 9, 2004.
When issuing CMO-3, the court gave Lilly the right to designate documents confidential, as long as Lilly "in good faith" believed that they were. However legal experts say the secret documents at issue here never should have been covered by a protective order.
According to attorneys in the case, in entering CMO-3, the court did not articulate the reasons why a protective order was necessary or set forth any criteria to use when determining whether a document was actually confidential and deserving of protection.
Yet instead of keeping the focus on why the 11 million documents were ever permitted to remain hidden in the first place, Judge Weinstein is allowing Lilly to hammer away at the messengers who gave the documents to the press, after deciding that the information needed to be circulated before more people were injured and killed.
In a January 17, 2007, hearing, Mr Gottstein was asked: "In this particular case involving Zyprexa, at the time you subpoenaed Dr. Egilman, had you the impression that Eli Lilly had deliberately withheld from the public and from physicians adverse side effects of Zyprexa?"
He answered: "Absolutely."
Mr Gottstein was then asked whether it was his impression that there were thousands of cases of harm to people from Zyprexa, while Lilly was in the process of settling cases out of court, and he said yes and that was why he wanted the documents out there "to protect people from this drug."
He had nothing to gain personally by providing the documents the Times. Mr Gottstein testified that he does not represent clients who were injured by Zyprexa for money damages and that his sole interest was protecting patients.
On January 25, 2007, in response to a request for Dr Egilman to appear at a deposition in preparation for Lilly to file civil and criminal contempt of court charges against him, though his attorney, Dr Egilman informed Lilly's legal team that he will refuse to testify under the protection of the Fifth Amendment.
A number of persons restrained by the injunction have obtained attorneys to file briefs with First Amendment arguments including the public's right to know what is in the documents and some people appeared at the last court hearing.
Ms Sharav and Dr Cohen point out in their brief, that they are not ex-employees of Lilly who have stolen trade secrets. They are merely a public health advocate and a professor who seek to share Lilly's own words with the public and they view exposing the information that "Lilly wants so desperately to keep hidden" as their primary public role.
Ms Sharav testified at the January 17, 2007, hearing, and when asked why she was interested in the documents by a Lilly attorney, said because they document the fact that Lilly knew in 2000, that Zyprexa caused diabetes, "from a group of doctors that they hired who told them you have to come clean."
"And instead of warning doctors who are widely prescribing the drug," she testified, "Eli Lilly set about in an aggressive marketing campaign to primary doctors."
"Little children are being given this drug," she said, "Little children are being exposed to horrific diseases that end their lives shorter."
"Now, I consider that a major crime," she stated, "to continue to conceal these facts from the public is I think really not in the public interest. This is a safety issue."
Lilly's attorney asked the court to strike her comments from the record but the request was denied.
Attorney, Alan Milstein, appeared on behalf of Ms Sharav, the AHRP, and Dr Cohen, and toward the end of the hearing noted that in handling the underlying Zypexa litigation, the judge had had occasion to look at the documents in question or at least to read the Times articles and stated: "What is abundantly clear is that they are not trade secrets."
"Lilly in no way fears dissemination of these documents to their competitors, to Merck or to Glaxo," Mr Milstein told Judge Weinstein.
"What Lilly wants to prevent," he said, "is the public at large, the consumers of its products, from seeing these documents and learning the truth about the product that Lilly produces and the way it markets it."
"Documents like that are not confidential and should not be marked confidential," he stated.
At the end of the hearing, the judge instructed the parties to file more briefs and another hearing is scheduled for February 7, 2007, for oral arguments.
In the latest turn of events, right out of the blue, Judge Weinstein issued an order this week with an "invitation" for Mr Berenson to appear in court to give testimony and be cross-examined on whether he participated in a conspiracy with Mr Gottstein and Dr Egilman to violate the original court order that sealed the documents.
In the meantime, while this circus plays out in the courts, every day thousands of doctors and patients are making uninformed decisions on whether to use Zyprexa. And the injury clock is ticking.
Allen Jones, a former fraud investigator in the Pennsylvania Office of Inspector General, states: "My best effort at correlating dollars spent with deaths suggests that people may be dying from side effects at the rate of at least one death for each one million dollars spent on the drug." (Emphasis added by Justice Lover)
Evelyn Pringle is an investigative journalist.
She can be reached at: evelyn-pringle@sbcglobal.net.
USA VETERANS NOW TARGETED BY PSYCHIATRY/BIG PHARMA
emailed to me by Parents Against TeenScreen (USA)
parents_against_teenscreen@earthlink.net
You're already aware of TeenScreen's psychiatric/pharmaceutical plan for school children. The grand scheme is to target other captive audiences as well. The elderly in nursing homes and soldiers for example.
And now Veterans are being targeted. Below is a sample letter you can get out to any and all veterans and veteran groups that you can find.
-------------
Dear Veterans,
I am writing to you on an important matter. There is a U.S. Government backed plan to "suicide screen" every child in the United States before they graduate from high school. Evidence exists that shows massive pharmaceutical backing that will result in even more overdrugging of kids with psychiatric drugs .
Can you please take a moment to view this short video? Click here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfU9puZQKBY
And then sign and forward this petition http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html to your associates and everyone you know?
It's simply a race to inform enough parents so that something can be done about this dangerous manipulation by Big Pharma and its allies.
Over 750 doctors have already signed the petition.
What does this have to do with veterans? Plenty. Veterans are also now being targeted.
A federal bill, H. R. 327 was introduced last month to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to develop and implement a comprehensive program to screen veterans who receive medical care at a Department of Veterans Affairs medical facilities for "risk factors of suicide".
The bill provides for tracking and referral of veterans "at risk of suicide" to "treatment" and encourages veterans to seek "treatment". Treatment means only one thing : Psychiatric drugging.
You can find the complete text of the federal bill by going to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and typing in suicide prevention.
(Emphasis added by Justice Lover).
Sincerely,
.............
emailed to me by Parents Against TeenScreen (USA)
parents_against_teenscreen@earthlink.net
You're already aware of TeenScreen's psychiatric/pharmaceutical plan for school children. The grand scheme is to target other captive audiences as well. The elderly in nursing homes and soldiers for example.
And now Veterans are being targeted. Below is a sample letter you can get out to any and all veterans and veteran groups that you can find.
-------------
Dear Veterans,
I am writing to you on an important matter. There is a U.S. Government backed plan to "suicide screen" every child in the United States before they graduate from high school. Evidence exists that shows massive pharmaceutical backing that will result in even more overdrugging of kids with psychiatric drugs .
Can you please take a moment to view this short video? Click here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfU9puZQKBY
And then sign and forward this petition http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html to your associates and everyone you know?
It's simply a race to inform enough parents so that something can be done about this dangerous manipulation by Big Pharma and its allies.
Over 750 doctors have already signed the petition.
What does this have to do with veterans? Plenty. Veterans are also now being targeted.
A federal bill, H. R. 327 was introduced last month to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to develop and implement a comprehensive program to screen veterans who receive medical care at a Department of Veterans Affairs medical facilities for "risk factors of suicide".
The bill provides for tracking and referral of veterans "at risk of suicide" to "treatment" and encourages veterans to seek "treatment". Treatment means only one thing : Psychiatric drugging.
You can find the complete text of the federal bill by going to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and typing in suicide prevention.
(Emphasis added by Justice Lover).
Sincerely,
.............
Thursday, February 1, 2007
Another one bites the dust - Los Angeles, CALIFORNIA
emailed to me by Ken Kramer,(USA)
You are hereby authorized to view the new addition to the " Bites the Dust" page here: http://www.teenscreen-locations.com/noteenscreen.htm
but only after you put on your dancing shoes!
Will your school be added next?
Ramona Elementary School in the Alhambra Unified School District in Los Angeles County, California was suicide screening kids in the
4th, 5th and 6th grades. Since the kids were not yet teens, they renamed it the "The Barriers to Learning Screening Program."
TeenScreen uses various techniques to lure kids including promises of free movie passes, food coupons, "I completed TeenScreen" stress balls and pizza parties. At Ramona Elementary they used: "Raffle Drawings!!!!! - Return this form immediately and you can win a prize!"
"The TeenScreen program no longer exists at Ramona School".
TeenScreen attempts to keep the schools they've infiltrated secret for fear of an uprising against child suicide screening. Although not all have been ferreted out - you will find many of the schools discovered at the above website.
If your state's schools are listed, please get active and do something about it. If they are not listed, please contact your school district and ask them if they have it or not. (Emphasis added by Justice Lover)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17,902 total signatures: http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfU9puZQKBY
emailed to me by Ken Kramer,
You are hereby authorized to view the new addition to the " Bites the Dust" page here: http://www.teenscreen-locations.com/noteenscreen.htm
but only after you put on your dancing shoes!
Will your school be added next?
Ramona Elementary School in the Alhambra Unified School District in Los Angeles County, California was suicide screening kids in the
4th, 5th and 6th grades. Since the kids were not yet teens, they renamed it the "The Barriers to Learning Screening Program."
TeenScreen uses various techniques to lure kids including promises of free movie passes, food coupons, "I completed TeenScreen" stress balls and pizza parties. At Ramona Elementary they used: "Raffle Drawings!!!!! - Return this form immediately and you can win a prize!"
"The TeenScreen program no longer exists at Ramona School".
TeenScreen attempts to keep the schools they've infiltrated secret for fear of an uprising against child suicide screening. Although not all have been ferreted out - you will find many of the schools discovered at the above website.
If your state's schools are listed, please get active and do something about it. If they are not listed, please contact your school district and ask them if they have it or not. (Emphasis added by Justice Lover)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17,902 total signatures: http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfU9puZQKBY
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
