My note –

I was thinking about it and if suicide is a known side effect of psychiatric drugs, then it means that during the testing of these drugs – more than one “someone” committed suicide or violence against themselves or others while taking these drugs during the testing phase.

But why, as in the case below, would the psychiatrists and doctors subject this woman to this – “after giving birth and was subsequently prescribed a cocktail of intensely controversial psychiatric drugs including anti-psychotic, anti-anxiety, and anti-depressant drugs before being subjected to electroshock treatment.”

only after receiving mental health “treatment” did she commit suicide. That is what the mental health industry did for a new mother named Melanie Stokes.

Why was she forced to endure a torture like this by the people around her and by her family and by her community and by her doctors that she trusted? What caused them to put her through a hell which only made matters worse to a degree that is nothing short of sadistic?

What did she do to deserve this? Was it because she committed the “mortal sin” of being unhappy about having her baby rather than being a “good woman” who is happy about it? Do women constitute an abnormality basic to the fact that they are different than men and therefore deserve to be changed by forced drug therapies? Or is it that the “norms” are based on 1930’s ideas of what are the ”average normal” feelings for some given situation?

Is a woman supposed to be happy about the constraints of freedom caused by motherhood, the complete change of lifestyle, the constant workload that is created when that child is born, the fat body, the carefree youth gone and the looming future stacked with diapers, dirty dishes, dirty clothes and drudgery? Isn’t it true that the real support would be anything other than a drug which makes it even more nightmarish and difficult to deal with those things?

If she hadn’t been subjected to this further torture on top of what she already had to deal with, wouldn’t her child’s mother be alive today – wouldn’t she still be alive finding ways to work through these things, instead of gone? She and many others that have been living testament to the truth about these drugs, mean one thing for absolutely sure.

When psychiatrists, doctors and pharmaceutical companies think that what they are doing makes good money but doesn’t hurt anybody – they are wrong, they are delusional and they are selfish to the point of sadism in the subjection and oppression of others by a prescribed regimen of chemical torture under the guise of “help”.

They knew these drugs were causing people to commit suicide and murder and violent acts of aggression. They knew there were a multitude of side effects cause directly by each of these drugs and in combinations there are even more hellish effects from them, so they’ve been prescribing these combinations and raising the dosages. What kind of decency is that? There is nothing but evil in that.

The only social goal would have to have been to completely debilitate entire populations of women, children, young females, families and individuals, especially creatives and free-thinking diversity in our population. There is no other possibility – since that was proven to be exactly the debilitation that occurs to people when subjected to these drugs. And it has literally robbed hundreds of thousands of lives and their freedoms to pursue their happiness, their human rights that were guaranteed and their futures, along with robbing all of us in every community of the accomplishments and contributions to our society that these individuals and families would have made. It is a crime what these pharmaceutical companies and their psychiatric professionals have propagated and when they did it – there was definitely intention.

History will prove they are barbaric.

– cricketdiane,

Fox, Douglas Kennedy, Lilly pays $1.42 billion in Zyprexa suit


The MOTHERS ACT has been reintroduced in the U.S. Senate (S. 324 introduced Jan 26 2009).

This bill quite simply is a feeder line for the psycho-pharmaceutical industry and will result in more mothers and infants being put at risk for being prescribed antidepressant and other dangerous psychiatric drugs. These drugs are documented by the U.S. FDA to cause birth defects, psychosis, mania, worsening depression, suicidal and homicidal ideation.

The Melanie Blocker Stokes MOTHERS Act is a federal bill named after Melanie Stokes, a woman who suffered emotional difficulties after giving birth and was subsequently prescribed a cocktail of intensely controversial psychiatric drugs including anti-psychotic, anti-anxiety, and anti-depressant drugs before being subjected to electroshock treatment.

Melanie Stokes was in the mental health system, was prescribed drugs, was hospitalized, was subjected to the still barbaric practice of electroshock and only after receiving mental health “treatment” did she commit suicide. That is what the mental health industry did for a new mother named Melanie Stokes. It is incredible that a story such as this does not raise alarm bells within Congress on the negligence of prescribing cocktails of psychiatric drugs to new mothers, drugs documented by the US FDA and international drug regulatory agencies to cause not only a host of documented adverse events for adults, but also for the unborn children of pregnant women who incredibly, are being prescribed these drugs even during pregnancy.

Despite the industry’s rhetoric about the need for more mental health treatment of pregnant women and new mothers, the fact remains that the most common treatment for women diagnosed with postpartum depression is drugs. There is absolutely no language in the Mothers Act that will ensure mothers being “screened” for postpartum depression are granted the most fundamental right of “informed consent,” meaning, per the legal definition, they are warned about all the risks of the proposed treatments and all the alternatives. Please stand up for the rights of mothers and don’t let this bill pass.

The opposition to the Mothers Act is simple. It puts the government in a position where they can mandate subjective screening and then determine the fate of a mother and her child –all without any evidence based scientific tests. I urge you to vote NO on this lethal legislation.


How Big Pharma Distorts Science to Get FDA Approval for Dangerous Drugs

By Martha Rosenberg, AlterNet. Posted April 20, 2009.

How does Big Pharma keep getting dangerous drugs approved? Through the best articles and spokesmen money can buy.

In February the Justice Department charged Forest Laboratories with illegally marketing antidepressants Celexa and Lexapro to younger patients and burying a study that showed suicidal side effects in children. But the very next month the FDA approved Lexapro for depression in adolescents 12 to 17.

In March the Justice Department charged AstraZeneca with knowing and hiding the diabetes side effects of Seroquel. But this month the FDA considers expanding the antipsychotic’s approvals to depression and anxiety.

And in January, Eli Lilly pled guilty to promoting its antipsychotic Zyprexa for unapproved and dangerous uses in a $1.4 billion settlement. But in March the FDA approved Lilly’s Zyprexa/Prozac combo, Symbyax, for treatment resistant depression (TRD). What do you get when you cross Zyprexa with Prozac? Someone who gains 100 pounds and feels great about it

TRD  is such a new pharma invention that Googling it brings up Toyota Racing Development and Teacher Recruitment Days. But it will soon move prescriptions like GAD (general anxiety disorder), MDD (major depressive disorder) ADD (attention deficit disorder) RLS (restless legs syndrome) GERD (gastroesophageal reflux disease) and PMDD (Premenstrual dysphoric disorder) — and for the same reasons.

How do dangerous drugs keep getting approved? Through the best articles and spokesmen money can buy.

Forest paid Massachusetts General Hospital researcher Jeffrey Bostic $750,000 to chat up Celexa and Lexapro, according to US District Court in Boston filings. AstraZeneca paid University of Minnesota researcher Charles Schulz $112,000 to push Seroquel, according to US District Court in Orlando filings. And a decade of pain  studies  conducted by Baystate Medical Center’s Scott S. Reuben on Vioxx, Lyrica, Celebrex and Effexor were completely fabricated–including the patients say published reports.

And speaking of  made up,  Coast IRB, an institutional review board which oversees some 300 clinical trials and 3,000 researchers, agreed last year to approve a human trial for  Adhesiabloc,  a surgical gel that the Government Accountability Office completely made up in a sting operation. Oops.

And let’s not forget Joseph your-child-is-bipolar Biederman, a Harvard physician who, according to the New York Times, assured benefactor Johnson & Johnson his studies would have favorable results for the drug Risperdal in advance of doing them. (Why leave things up to science?)

And Charles  Paxil  Nemeroff, MD who was forced to step down in December as psychiatry chairman at Emory University thanks to unreported GlaxoSmithKline income of up to $800,000.

And the pharma funded studies continue

Last May a pro Lexapro article,  Escitalopram and Problem-Solving Therapy for Prevention of Poststroke Depression,  ran in JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association, with no mention of financial ties author Robert G. Robinson has to Forest.

Why was,  a researcher with a history of being funded by SSRI makers…given a forum in the national media to tell the general public that anyone who has had a stroke, whether or not they have been diagnosed with depression, should start a prophylactic regimen of Lexapro…even though non-medical approaches perform just as well,  wrote Jonathan Leo, PhD, Associate Professor of Neuroanatomy at Lincoln Memorial University in the British Medical Journal in March.

And then there’s AstraZeneca.

AstraZeneca’s best selling Seroquel — it made $4.5 billion last year while only approved for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder — is linked to high blood sugar, weight gain, diabetes, cholesterol and triglycerides abnormalities, sudden cardiac death, suicide, neuroleptic malignant syndrome and the tardive dyskinesia it is supposed to prevent.

But its  safety  was established by a different kind of chemistry.

Research director for Seroquel, Wayne MacFadden, was having affairs with two women responsible for Seroquel studies, according to court documents: one was a researcher at the Institute of Psychiatry in London and another a ghostwriter at Waltham, MA-based medical communications firm Parexel. In fact the studies upon which the FDA approved Seroquel for bipolar disorder– called  Bolder  I and II — were written by a ghostwriter.

Worse, sitting on the FDA’s Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee at the time was Jorge Armenteros, MD, a paid AstraZeneca speaker according to the Philadelphia Inquirer. Today he heads the committee.

Hopefully FDA will keep some Seroquel for itself.


The facts in the Zyprexa case are heartbreaking. The victim, Philip Ebel, suffered from crushing headaches, for which he tried no fewer than 47 different treatments. His doctor in Texas, in consultation with a neurologist from a headache clinic in Michigan, finally prescribed Zyprexa — an anti-psychotic prescribed off-label for headaches. Ebel took Zyprexa for four months before killing himself in 2002.

His doctor testified at a deposition that he was aware of Zyprexa’s side effects, including an increased risk of suicide, and that he told Ebel about them. The 5th Circuit, in agreement with the lower court, ruled that because Ebel and his doctor were aware of the risks, Lilly’s alleged failure to warn could not be  a producing cause  of Ebel’s death.


Iran, China, Russia and Cuba put together haven’t tortured and killed as many American citizens as the Republican Party, George Bush, the conservatives, psychiatrists and the pharmaceutical companies in The United States have tortured, maimed and killed. We look at those countries as enemies because of their human rights abuses. What kind of country have the Republicans created under our feet over the past thirty years they’ve been in power, where the human rights violations and abuses in the United States are even more pervasive, more consummately evil and more extensive than any of those countries or even, all of them put together?

Is it because those countries being kinder than us – took people out and just shot them in a ditch instead of poisoning them with peanut butter sandwiches from tainted peanut butter, killed them with E.Coli bacteria from mishandled meat products because of inspectors who didn’t want to offend their Republican “handlers” and supervisors?

Is it because those countries took people off in the middle of the night to shoot them instead of what is done in the US by taking people out of their homes in the full light of day and then subjecting them to chemical lobotomies using the most horrendous cocktails of pharmaceuticals that hell has ever designed, causing them to kill themselves or commit acts of violence resulting in the deaths of many?

Whose side has our conservative Republican government run by Christian fundamentalists been serving? Our enemies haven’t killed, raped and tortured as many people as the business and social policies of the Republican Party have done right here on our own soil using all the trappings of making a profit while they’ve been doing it.

And in all cases, it would’ve been a kinder, more merciful death if  our government’s ineptitude, profiteering and its big business friends and mental health systems / pharmaceutical companies had just shot the victims. Instead of them being forced to endure a tortured experience of food poisoning, or the horrendous drug side effects of psychiatric drugs plus the mental and physical anguish of a nation’s betrayal of trust before dying or killing themselves or killing themselves and others.

Didn’t we used to call those that do that to our people – “enemies”? Isn’t that why we made some countries into our enemies  – for their human rights abuses and violations of civil and human rights?

“Nobody accuses these perpetrators who have committed inhumane violent actions against women, against the poor and against both prisoners of war and the regular people of America, as insane. No, they’re given fine opportunities and will go on to work somewhere else putting forth their distorted and malicious views of the world. In fact, if history serves anything it is to tell us that every one of these perpetrators in America will be treated like kings while the rest of us are treated like slaves and otherwise useless aggravations.” – my quote from a couple days ago – I liked it.

The case is centered around Savana Redding, now 19, who in 2003 was an eighth-grade honors student at Safford Middle School, about 127 miles from Tucson, Arizona. Redding was strip-searched by school officials after a fellow student accused her of providing prescription-strength ibuprofen pills.

In this case, the United States Supreme Court will decide how easy it is for school officials to strip search your child,  Adam Wolf, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union who is representing Redding, told CNN Radio on Sunday.

Wolf told CNN Radio his client was traumatized by the search.

Redding was pulled from class by a male vice principal, escorted to an office, where she denied the accusations.

A search of Redding’s backpack found nothing. Then, although she never had prior disciplinary problems, a strip search was conducted with the help of a school nurse and Wilson’s assistant, both females. According to court records, she was ordered to strip to her underwear and her bra was pulled out. Again, no drugs were found.

In an affidavit, Redding said,  The strip search was the most humiliating experience I have ever had. I held my head down so that they could not see that I was about to cry.

A federal appeals court found the search  traumatizing  and illegal.

the full 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Redding last year.

Common sense informs us,  wrote the court,  that directing a 13-year-old girl to remove her clothes, partially revealing her breasts and pelvic area, for allegedly possessing ibuprofen … was excessively intrusive.

The case is Safford United School District No. 1 v. Redding (08-479).


So, instead of this honors student being involved and focused on the normal activities of growing up and going to college, dating and friendships – she has spent the last six years involved in this view of the US court system. There was no reasonable occasion for the search in the first place. Humiliating and shaming a thirteen year old girl in this way yields nothing of value.

They sure did educate her about freedoms, rights and human dignity in the United States of America as they educate everyone who hears this story and every student that has been exposed to it. When did the authorities in the US come to hate the people that they are paid to serve, even our young women like this one who had been excelling in school? Or is that what they hate? Are they targeting those who excel, those who are intelligent, those who are gifted, those who are brilliant, those who are creative, who are inventive and innovative and bring new ways of doing things to our world?

Between our education system being the way it is and the pharmaceutical companies use of the mental health industry to torture and abuse those particular groups especially – it sure looks like it. And, then the United States government turns around and says we need to be innovative and invent new things and help them create their way out of the mess we’re in. Figures.

– cricketdiane, 04-22-09