Thursday, 25 February 2010
Wednesday, 24 February 2010
Panorama found 'in breach of BBC rules' - episode looked at the long-term use of drugs in children with ADHD
Panorama found 'in breach of BBC rules'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8534718.stm
The episode looked at the long-term use of drugs in children with ADHD
BBC current affairs programme Panorama will broadcast an apology after the corporation's independent watchdog said it breached editorial guidelines.
The BBC Trust Editorial Standards Committee said it did not accurately report a study into Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).
What Next for Craig? looked at the use of drugs used to control the condition when it aired in November 2007.
The Trust said the show did not intend to mislead, but "distorted" some facts.
An apology will be broadcast during a future edition of Panorama, and the BBC's deputy director general Mark Byford will meet the committee to ensure the breaches are not repeated.
Failings
The committee partially upheld an appeal over a complaint.
It was ruled that Panorama did not accurately report the findings of a follow-up scientific study comparing the treatment of children with ADHD.
The programme makers have been accused of relying on the views of one scientist and viewers were not told that there is a wide range of views on the subject.
The episode also looked into the long-term use of stimulant drugs such as Ritalin.
But it was ruled that show failed to accurately report the findings of a three-year study which was conducted in the US.
Although the committee said that programme makers did not intend to mislead the audience, it did point out that "the programme failed to meet the requirements of impartiality in that the programme makers were not fair and open minded when examining the evidence and weighing all the material facts, nor were they even handed in their approach to the subject".
The report concluded: "The Editorial Standards Committee (ESC) expects the highest standards from Panorama as BBC One's flagship current affairs programme, and this programme failed to reach those standards.
"Due to the serious nature of the breaches the ESC will apologise to the complainant on behalf of the BBC and require the broadcast of a correction."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8534718.stm
The episode looked at the long-term use of drugs in children with ADHD
BBC current affairs programme Panorama will broadcast an apology after the corporation's independent watchdog said it breached editorial guidelines.
The BBC Trust Editorial Standards Committee said it did not accurately report a study into Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).
What Next for Craig? looked at the use of drugs used to control the condition when it aired in November 2007.
The Trust said the show did not intend to mislead, but "distorted" some facts.
An apology will be broadcast during a future edition of Panorama, and the BBC's deputy director general Mark Byford will meet the committee to ensure the breaches are not repeated.
Failings
The committee partially upheld an appeal over a complaint.
It was ruled that Panorama did not accurately report the findings of a follow-up scientific study comparing the treatment of children with ADHD.
The programme makers have been accused of relying on the views of one scientist and viewers were not told that there is a wide range of views on the subject.
The episode also looked into the long-term use of stimulant drugs such as Ritalin.
But it was ruled that show failed to accurately report the findings of a three-year study which was conducted in the US.
Although the committee said that programme makers did not intend to mislead the audience, it did point out that "the programme failed to meet the requirements of impartiality in that the programme makers were not fair and open minded when examining the evidence and weighing all the material facts, nor were they even handed in their approach to the subject".
The report concluded: "The Editorial Standards Committee (ESC) expects the highest standards from Panorama as BBC One's flagship current affairs programme, and this programme failed to reach those standards.
"Due to the serious nature of the breaches the ESC will apologise to the complainant on behalf of the BBC and require the broadcast of a correction."
Monday, 22 February 2010
Sunday, 21 February 2010
Psychdata - Doctoring the Evidence: GlaxoSmithKline
Psychdata - Dedicated to exposing the fraud of psychiatry: Doctoring the Evidence: GlaxoSmithKline Pushes Depression Drug
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Doctoring the Evidence: GlaxoSmithKline Pushes Depression Drug
http://corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14606
Doctoring the Evidence: GlaxoSmithKline Pushes Depression Drug
by Shelley Jofre, Special to Corp Watch
July 30th, 2007
A striking young woman with a talent for painting, Sharise Gatchell was - like many teenagers - painfully self-conscious. At 14, she moved with her family from South Africa to England where at first she found it hard to make friends. By the age of 16 she was acutely embarrassed that her periods hadn't started and felt she was sweating excessively. Just the sort of thing to make adolescence even more painful than usual. Her mother, Stephanie, took her to see a consultant physician at the local hospital. Stephanie Gatchell recalls:
.............
...........................
Meanwhile, Stephanie Gatchell and her husband have moved away from the home that holds so many awful memories, to start a new life in Ireland. They can't forgive GlaxoSmithKline for concealing what it knew about paroxetine:
"I can't understand how they could possibly be so devious, and all just because of profit. I think the decision-makers in that company should be brought to justice. They have a lot to explain."
*Shelley Jofre is a reporter with BBC TV's flagship current affairs program: Panorama. To learn more about Sharise Gatchell, see http://www.gevil.netopti.net/.
GlaxoSmithKline issued a statement in response to Shelley Jofre's investigation.
Posted by Psychdata at 9:30 PM
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Doctoring the Evidence: GlaxoSmithKline Pushes Depression Drug
http://corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14606
Doctoring the Evidence: GlaxoSmithKline Pushes Depression Drug
by Shelley Jofre, Special to Corp Watch
July 30th, 2007
A striking young woman with a talent for painting, Sharise Gatchell was - like many teenagers - painfully self-conscious. At 14, she moved with her family from South Africa to England where at first she found it hard to make friends. By the age of 16 she was acutely embarrassed that her periods hadn't started and felt she was sweating excessively. Just the sort of thing to make adolescence even more painful than usual. Her mother, Stephanie, took her to see a consultant physician at the local hospital. Stephanie Gatchell recalls:
.............
...........................
Meanwhile, Stephanie Gatchell and her husband have moved away from the home that holds so many awful memories, to start a new life in Ireland. They can't forgive GlaxoSmithKline for concealing what it knew about paroxetine:
"I can't understand how they could possibly be so devious, and all just because of profit. I think the decision-makers in that company should be brought to justice. They have a lot to explain."
*Shelley Jofre is a reporter with BBC TV's flagship current affairs program: Panorama. To learn more about Sharise Gatchell, see http://www.gevil.netopti.net/.
GlaxoSmithKline issued a statement in response to Shelley Jofre's investigation.
Posted by Psychdata at 9:30 PM
CorpWatch : Doctoring the Evidence: GlaxoSmithKline Pushes Depression Drug
CorpWatch : Doctoring the Evidence: GlaxoSmithKline Pushes Depression Drug
http://corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14606
by Shelley Jofre, Special to Corp Watch
July 30th, 2007
A striking young woman with a talent for painting, Sharise Gatchell was - like many teenagers - painfully self-conscious. At 14, she moved with her family from South Africa to England where at first she found it hard to make friends. By the age of 16 she was acutely embarrassed that her periods hadn't started and felt she was sweating excessively. Just the sort of thing to make adolescence even more painful than usual. Her mother, Stephanie, took her to see a consultant physician at the local hospital. Stephanie Gatchell recalls:
"During that consultation she became a bit emotional because she was explaining to him about the problems she had and how it affected her social life. Then she started crying
read on -
http://corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14606
http://corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14606
by Shelley Jofre, Special to Corp Watch
July 30th, 2007
A striking young woman with a talent for painting, Sharise Gatchell was - like many teenagers - painfully self-conscious. At 14, she moved with her family from South Africa to England where at first she found it hard to make friends. By the age of 16 she was acutely embarrassed that her periods hadn't started and felt she was sweating excessively. Just the sort of thing to make adolescence even more painful than usual. Her mother, Stephanie, took her to see a consultant physician at the local hospital. Stephanie Gatchell recalls:
"During that consultation she became a bit emotional because she was explaining to him about the problems she had and how it affected her social life. Then she started crying
read on -
http://corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14606
Mark Harvey takes 7 years to tell Seroxat suicide client he had no case
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uksurvivors/message/55547
Seroxat lawyer can see NO LINK with Seroxat & client suicide !
i...@lancashirecaravans.co.uk View profile We had some bad news today, the solicitors acting on our behalf, wrote to us saying they could not find a link between Susan trying to kill herself (several times) and the use of Seroxat, and that they will no longer handle our case, they have been dealing with this for the past 7 years or so.... and after this time, that is their conclusion.... useless, all they see is text book stuff, they cannot see outside of the box the way I can. Now, we have less than 8 weeks to beat the 10 year time limit to get this to court, I want to know how I can at least start court proceedings against Glaxo without the aid of solicitors, can someone advise us on how to start the proceedings in court. Simon
More options Feb 8 2007, 5:25 pm
Newsgroups: uk.legal
From: si...@lancashirecaravans.co.uk
Date: 8 Feb 2007 09:25:48 -0800
Local: Thurs, Feb 8 2007 5:25 pm
Subject: how do I start court proceedings
We had some bad news today, the solicitors acting on our behalf, wrote
to us saying they could not find a link between Susan trying to kill
herself (several times) and the use of Seroxat, and that they will no
longer handle our case, they have been dealing with this for the past
7 years or so.... and after this time, that is their conclusion....
useless, all they see is text book stuff, they cannot see outside of
the box the way I can.
Now, we have less than 8 weeks to beat the 10 year time limit to get
this to court, I want to know how I can at least start court
proceedings against Glaxo without the aid of solicitors, can someone
advise us on how to start the proceedings in court.
Simon
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.legal/browse_thread/thread/f4a60cf8dc96c472/ef879327dd8aa07b?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=shelley+jofre&pli=1
More options Feb 8 2007, 5:25 pm
Newsgroups: uk.legal
From: si...@lancashirecaravans.co.uk
Date: 8 Feb 2007 09:25:48 -0800
Local: Thurs, Feb 8 2007 5:25 pm
Subject: how do I start court proceedings
We had some bad news today, the solicitors acting on our behalf, wrote
to us saying they could not find a link between Susan trying to kill
herself (several times) and the use of Seroxat, and that they will no
longer handle our case, they have been dealing with this for the past
7 years or so.... and after this time, that is their conclusion....
useless, all they see is text book stuff, they cannot see outside of
the box the way I can.
Now, we have less than 8 weeks to beat the 10 year time limit to get
this to court, I want to know how I can at least start court
proceedings against Glaxo without the aid of solicitors, can someone
advise us on how to start the proceedings in court.
Simon
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.legal/browse_thread/thread/f4a60cf8dc96c472/ef879327dd8aa07b?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=shelley+jofre&pli=1
Saturday, 20 February 2010
Seroxat USERS collaborate with GSK & MHRA to approve Patient Info Leaflet
http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/groups/pl-p/documents/committeedocument/con003475.pdf
6.2 DRAFT SEROXAT PATIENT INFORMATION LEAFLET
6.2.1 The Group was informed that the Seroxat Patient Information Leaflet (PIL) will form a key component of any communications around the time of European Commission Decision in relation to the Article 31 referral for paroxetine.
6.2.2 Upon request GSK has submitted an amended version of the Seroxat PIL that reflects the changes to the product information for prescribers recommended
H:JW/SSRIEWGMINSMTG13.doc
by the recommended by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. GSK has also outlined its plans to user test this leaflet using a company called Consumation. The Group was informed that the MHRA was also planning to have users independently test the leaflet and commitments had been given to various stakeholders that their comments would be sought.
6.2.3 The Group was informed that GSK was provided with initial feedback on the draft Seroxat PIL during a meeting held between the MHRA and GSK on 15 July 2004. In light of these discussions GSK has provided a further draft which takes these comments into account. The Group had the following comments about the content and format of the revised draft Seroxat PIL:
extract from -
COMMITTEE ON SAFETY OF MEDICINES
EXPERT GROUP ON SAFETY OF SSRIs
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CSM EXPERT GROUP ON THE SAFETY OF SSRIS HELD ON WEDNESDAY 23 JULY 2004 AT 10AM IN CR1 AT MARKET TOWERS.
6.2 DRAFT SEROXAT PATIENT INFORMATION LEAFLET
6.2.1 The Group was informed that the Seroxat Patient Information Leaflet (PIL) will form a key component of any communications around the time of European Commission Decision in relation to the Article 31 referral for paroxetine.
6.2.2 Upon request GSK has submitted an amended version of the Seroxat PIL that reflects the changes to the product information for prescribers recommended
H:JW/SSRIEWGMINSMTG13.doc
by the recommended by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. GSK has also outlined its plans to user test this leaflet using a company called Consumation. The Group was informed that the MHRA was also planning to have users independently test the leaflet and commitments had been given to various stakeholders that their comments would be sought.
6.2.3 The Group was informed that GSK was provided with initial feedback on the draft Seroxat PIL during a meeting held between the MHRA and GSK on 15 July 2004. In light of these discussions GSK has provided a further draft which takes these comments into account. The Group had the following comments about the content and format of the revised draft Seroxat PIL:
extract from -
COMMITTEE ON SAFETY OF MEDICINES
EXPERT GROUP ON SAFETY OF SSRIs
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CSM EXPERT GROUP ON THE SAFETY OF SSRIS HELD ON WEDNESDAY 23 JULY 2004 AT 10AM IN CR1 AT MARKET TOWERS.
Friday, 19 February 2010
Stalking: false claims of victimisation ..........thanks to our Australian readers for this topical article ROFL
The British Journal of Psychiatry 174: 170-172 (1999)
© 1999 The Royal College of Psychiatrists
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/abstract/174/2/170
Stalking: false claims of victimisation
M Pathe, PE Mullen and R Purcell
Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health, Rosanna, Australia.
BACKGROUND: False allegations of victimisation although uncommon are important to recognise. This paper examines those who falsely claim to have been the victims of stalking. AIMS: To highlight the phenomenon of false victims of stalking. METHOD: Twelve individuals who falsely claimed to be victims of stalking were compared with a group of 100 true stalking victims. RESULTS: False stalking victims presented for help earlier than real victims and were less likely to claim harassment via letters. They reported equivalent levels of violence directed at themselves but seldom claimed others were attacked. Five types of false claimants were recognisable. False victims consumed more medical services than genuine stalking victims and they were more likely to be embroiled in legal action. They reported similar levels of distress with suicidal ruminations in over 40%. CONCLUSIONS: The current interest in stalking is promoting false claims of being stalked. Early identification of these cases and appropriate intervention are essential to both minimising abuses of resources available to true victims and equally to ensure appropriate care for those who express their own disordered state in false claims of victimisation.
© 1999 The Royal College of Psychiatrists
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/abstract/174/2/170
Stalking: false claims of victimisation
M Pathe, PE Mullen and R Purcell
Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health, Rosanna, Australia.
BACKGROUND: False allegations of victimisation although uncommon are important to recognise. This paper examines those who falsely claim to have been the victims of stalking. AIMS: To highlight the phenomenon of false victims of stalking. METHOD: Twelve individuals who falsely claimed to be victims of stalking were compared with a group of 100 true stalking victims. RESULTS: False stalking victims presented for help earlier than real victims and were less likely to claim harassment via letters. They reported equivalent levels of violence directed at themselves but seldom claimed others were attacked. Five types of false claimants were recognisable. False victims consumed more medical services than genuine stalking victims and they were more likely to be embroiled in legal action. They reported similar levels of distress with suicidal ruminations in over 40%. CONCLUSIONS: The current interest in stalking is promoting false claims of being stalked. Early identification of these cases and appropriate intervention are essential to both minimising abuses of resources available to true victims and equally to ensure appropriate care for those who express their own disordered state in false claims of victimisation.
Fiddaman's publisher Jason Pegler's books available discount price at CCHR/Scientology
A Can Of Madness
http://www.cchr.org.uk/products/product_info.php?cPath=21_22&products_id=30&osCsid=5d1f2ddc99bc7eaf9bd4747002037c1b
[ACOM01] £9.99
Author: Jason Pegler
A vivid, honest and sometimes disturbing memoir about the experience of having a diagnosis of manic-depression. It was written using extracts from a diary written at the time of the author's flights into mania and his descents into depression. Like other books in this genre, the author is often painfully honest about his experiences. He recounts a dizzying, dark and sometimes euphoric journey through a world of elation, despair, binge drinking, drugs, raves and psychiatric wards. As well as attempting to educate the reader, the book also provides optimism and hope, showing that it is finally possible to learn to live with, and accept, having a mental health problem.
This product was added to our catalog on Tuesday, 17. July 2007.
[ACOM01] £9.99
Author: Jason Pegler
A vivid, honest and sometimes disturbing memoir about the experience of having a diagnosis of manic-depression. It was written using extracts from a diary written at the time of the author's flights into mania and his descents into depression. Like other books in this genre, the author is often painfully honest about his experiences. He recounts a dizzying, dark and sometimes euphoric journey through a world of elation, despair, binge drinking, drugs, raves and psychiatric wards. As well as attempting to educate the reader, the book also provides optimism and hope, showing that it is finally possible to learn to live with, and accept, having a mental health problem.
This product was added to our catalog on Tuesday, 17. July 2007.
Wednesday, 17 February 2010
The Evidence, however is clear ... Fiddaman blog bought by Scientology
Scientology award for Chipmunka publishing, the publishers of Fiddaman's book
http://www.johnalexwood.com/2007/04/worlds-largest-psychiatric-watchdog.html
Tuesday, 16 February 2010
The Paxil Papers - from Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness
The Paxil Papers
http://www.christopherlane.org/paxil_papers.html
This Paxil Fact File, containing confidential information about one of our most widely prescribed antidepressants and anti-anxiety medications, was drafted and distributed by SmithKline Beecham in 1998 for internal use only. Now GlaxoSmithKline, the drug maker acknowledges in these pages that Paxil/Seroxat causes serious, widespread side effects and withdrawal symptoms -- in the February 2001 paper below, it put that number at a staggering 20% of patients -- but it continued to press for an FDA license to treat social anxiety disorder (with symtoms including "fear of eating alone in a restaurant") and advised its staff on how to spin or mask the problem of withdrawal (change the subject or put the side effects "in context"). The FDA awarded the license in March 1999, just a few months after the fact file circulated.
In the BBC Panorama segments below, which aired in Britain on October 3, 2004, David Healy says we may come to see GSK's masking of data about these withdrawal symptoms as "one of the biggest medical scandals ever." Senior pharmaceutical regulators in the UK acknowledge that they were "disgusted" and "horrified" by the deliberate withholding of information. The President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, Dr. Mike Shooter, argues that the deception "has serious implications for the whole of psychiatry; it has serious implications for the whole of medicine." An investigative body in Britain is considering whether to indict the drug maker on criminal charges.
Foreword by Paul N. Jenner, Director and Vice President of Neuroscience and Strategic Product Development
Section 1: Towards the Second Billion -- All SSRIs Are Not the Same
Section 2: New Indications: Social Anxiety Disorder / Social Phobia
Section 3: Issues Management: Managing the Discontinuation Issue.
Related Papers and Programs
"Duration of Treatment and Depression: Relapse and Recurrence Rates" (February 2001; GlaxoSmithKline Confidential--Internal Use Only).
"Paxil CR" Product Monograph (GlaxoSmithKline; November 1, 2005).
Paxil Litigation Documents (Filed Under Seal; November 11, 2007).
GSK's Ghostwriting Agency "Budgeted for 50 articles in 2000," According to the Drug Maker Itself (April 2000).
BBC Panorama program "Taken on Trust" (UK; October 3, 2004):
Part 1 of 7 (9:36 minutes); part 2 (9:47 minutes); part 3 (9:41 minutes); part 4 (8:46 minutes); part 5 (9:39 minutes); part 6 (7:28 minutes); part 7 (7 minutes).
http://www.christopherlane.org/paxil_papers.html
This Paxil Fact File, containing confidential information about one of our most widely prescribed antidepressants and anti-anxiety medications, was drafted and distributed by SmithKline Beecham in 1998 for internal use only. Now GlaxoSmithKline, the drug maker acknowledges in these pages that Paxil/Seroxat causes serious, widespread side effects and withdrawal symptoms -- in the February 2001 paper below, it put that number at a staggering 20% of patients -- but it continued to press for an FDA license to treat social anxiety disorder (with symtoms including "fear of eating alone in a restaurant") and advised its staff on how to spin or mask the problem of withdrawal (change the subject or put the side effects "in context"). The FDA awarded the license in March 1999, just a few months after the fact file circulated.
In the BBC Panorama segments below, which aired in Britain on October 3, 2004, David Healy says we may come to see GSK's masking of data about these withdrawal symptoms as "one of the biggest medical scandals ever." Senior pharmaceutical regulators in the UK acknowledge that they were "disgusted" and "horrified" by the deliberate withholding of information. The President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, Dr. Mike Shooter, argues that the deception "has serious implications for the whole of psychiatry; it has serious implications for the whole of medicine." An investigative body in Britain is considering whether to indict the drug maker on criminal charges.
Foreword by Paul N. Jenner, Director and Vice President of Neuroscience and Strategic Product Development
Section 1: Towards the Second Billion -- All SSRIs Are Not the Same
Section 2: New Indications: Social Anxiety Disorder / Social Phobia
Section 3: Issues Management: Managing the Discontinuation Issue.
Related Papers and Programs
"Duration of Treatment and Depression: Relapse and Recurrence Rates" (February 2001; GlaxoSmithKline Confidential--Internal Use Only).
"Paxil CR" Product Monograph (GlaxoSmithKline; November 1, 2005).
Paxil Litigation Documents (Filed Under Seal; November 11, 2007).
GSK's Ghostwriting Agency "Budgeted for 50 articles in 2000," According to the Drug Maker Itself (April 2000).
BBC Panorama program "Taken on Trust" (UK; October 3, 2004):
Part 1 of 7 (9:36 minutes); part 2 (9:47 minutes); part 3 (9:41 minutes); part 4 (8:46 minutes); part 5 (9:39 minutes); part 6 (7:28 minutes); part 7 (7 minutes).
Seroxat Book -Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness (Paperback)
Reviews
Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness (2007):
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0300143176/theenglishdepart
Starred review. "Having gained access to archival materials from the APA, Lane provides a behind-the-scenes look at the haphazard, unscientific process used to revise The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. . . . [A] superb, iconoclastic cultural study. . . . Highly recommended."—Library Journal.
"Lane argues in this well-researched . . . controversial book that shyness [has been] pathologized, to the detriment, especially, of children and teenagers"—Elsa Dixler, New York Times Book Review.
"Lane has exposed a very worrying problem.... Looking at this book and at recent developments in information surveillance, it appears that both Orwell's and Huxley's predictions for the future are coming true"—Martin Guha, Journal of Mental Health.
"Christopher Lane's polemical Shyness features the manipulations that promoted social anxiety disorder to a national emergency."—Frederick Crews, New York Review of Books.
"Overall, Lane's scholarly account of this saga ensures that if you're not already concerned about the over-medicalization of our mental lives, you will be."—Christian Jarrett, BBC Focus.
"A provocative look at an important chapter in the history of modern psychiatry."—Judith Graham, Chicago Tribune.
"[An] excellent new book. . . . Shyness is a welcome contribution to psychiatric discourse."—Juliet Lapidos, New York Observer.
"A detailed and searing account of the cavalier fashion in which the diagnostic and statistical manual (DSM) of mental disorder classification systems was thrown together."—Nigel Wellman, Nursing Standard.
"In his brilliant Shyness: How Normal Behaviour Became a Sickness, Christopher Lane painstakingly shows how the category of 'mental disorder' has been expanded in recent decades, so that what were once considered normal emotions or everyday foibles—shyness, rebelliousness, aloofness, and so on—have been relabelled as phobias, disorders and syndromes."—Brendan O'Neill, New Statesman and Society.
"[A] splendid book. . . Lane gives a compelling description of how shyness—once seen as a normal variation of character or personality—became incorporated into the DSM as social phobia or avoidant personality disorder."—Simon Wessely, The Lancet.
"A fascinating behind-the-scenes look at the making of the bible of modern psychiatry [that] explains how a once-ordinary affliction became a profitable disease."—Michael Agger, Mother Jones.
"The achievement of Shyness is to chart for the first time the events preceding the rise and fall of the SSRIs. Lane has marshalled a cache of unpublished data to explain the academic framework that allowed the rise to happen. [He] tells the complex story with impressive clarity. . . . Lane has done a valuable job in tracing the roots of the current crisis and he certainly isn’t calling for a reinstatement of Freudianism; what is needed now is another map to indicate a way out."—Jerome Burne, Times Literary Supplement.
"This well-written book is a thoughtful examination of shyness and its relation to psychopathology. . . . I very much enjoyed reading Lane's thought-provoking book, and would highly recommend it for psychiatry residents, graduate students in clinical psychology, and other mental health professionals in training who are interested in the field of anxiety disorders, and more broadly in psychopathology and general mental health."—Brian J. Cox, New England Journal of Medicine.
"[A] stunning and revelatory book. . . . For a book that's about the invention of a medical condition, Shyness is as riveting as a detective story. Lane writes elegantly and passionately about the need to maintain our consciousness about the maddeningly rich complexity of human emotion and thought."—Yasmin Nair, Windy City Times.
"Christopher Lane's very readable book describes the process by which aspects of human character and behaviour have been labelled as mental disorders, as illnesses which can and should be treated."—James Docherty, The Salisbury Review.
"Fascinating . . . persuasive . . ., [Shyness] should be read by anyone interested in stopping the rot in the discussion of human emotion and thought."—Helene Guldberg, Spiked Review of Books.
"There is a great deal that's interesting in this book. . . . I recommend this book as a thought-provoking and informative read."—John D. Mullen, Metapsychology.
"As Lane’s research reveals, the cost of blaming anxieties on brain chemistry imbalance goes beyond dollars, to drug dependency, debilitating side effects and consumers convinced they’re hamstrung by their physiology."—Robin Tierney, San Francisco Examiner.
"Where this book stands out . . . is in the data that Lane uses to make his case—evidence confirming once and for all that the emperor really has no clothes. Lane not only manages to gain access to the DSM archives and to previously classified drug company memos—two coups by any measure—but he also interviews key players in the DSM saga, including long-time DSM Task Force Chair Robert Spitzer himself. . . That Spitzer even agreed to be interviewed by Lane—and with such remarkable openness—left this reader, as a fellow researcher with similar interests, green with envy."—Shelley Z. Reuter, Canadian Journal of Sociology.
"[A] scathing indictment of the American Psychiatric Association. . . . Lane finds a trove of troubling (and previously unpublished) material in the APA archive and in drug company memorandums, laying bare the APA’s internal politics (as fierce as academia) and showing the growing influence of drug companies on psychiatry practice. Similarly alarming are Lane’s dissections of big pharma’s marketing of anti-depressants and description of how information about side-effects and withdrawal symptoms associated with popular prescription drugs such as Prozac and Paxil were withheld from the public. This controversial and well-documented book will spark its share of debates."—Publishers Weekly.
Lane "charges that the task force, dominated by neuropsychiatrists, often used bad science or no science at all, that it turned ordinary human emotions into diseases and that it created a climate in which pharmaceutical companies could get rich creating cures for often nonexistent complexes."—Richard Halicks, op ed, Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
"Would Henry David Thoreau and Emily Dickinson be given drugs today? In the1980s a small group of leading psychiatrists revised the profession’s diagnostic manual called the DSM for short, adding social anxiety disorder—aka shyness—and dozens of other new conditions. Christopher Lane, Miller Research Professor at Northwestern University, uses previously secret documents, many from the American Psychiatric Association archives, to support his argument that these decisions were marked by carelessness, pervasive influence from the pharmaceutical industry, academic politics, and personal ambition."—Scientific American.
"Lane . . . notes that when psychiatrists diagnose the shy as suffering from social phobia, they mistake a variation in human temperament for a mental disorder; if anything, the diagnosis only adds to the sense of unease felt by shy people. He is also right in observing that the psychiatrists’ Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), the profession’s standard 900-page reference work, errs by designating other kinds of normal human variation as mental disorders and so exaggerates the incidence of mental illness. . . [Shyness] provides vivid portraits of how DSM-III was constructed, over the course of six years, by Dr. Spitzer and a team of 15, less from ‘the concentrated energies of brilliant minds than the raucous class of a teacher whose unruly pupils won’t stay quiet.’"—Paul, McHugh, Wall Street Journal.
"Christopher Lane deconstructs the new psychiatric condition ‘social anxiety disorder’ as a creation of corporate psychiatry’s alliance with the pharmaceutical industry. He argues that shyness became a medical condition best treated by drugs as a result of battles between psychiatrists over diagnostic techniques. . . . This book compares best to Ray Moynihan and Alan Cassels’ Selling Sickness. Highly recommended for general readers, healthcare professionals and practitioners."—Choice.
"Christopher Lane . . . calls psychiatry's growing focus on children 'the perfect storm' for overdiagnosis. 'You've got a constituency—children—who cannot make informed medical decisions for themselves,' Lane says. In a fast-moving culture that heaps stress and high expectations on children, 'parents are in many cases under great pressure to ensure their child succeeds and is socially proficient. A child that doesn't negotiate rapidly those hurdles can look very quickly as if he or she is falling behind, or displaying behavior that warrants medical concern.'"—Melissa Healy, Los Angeles Times.
"This is not only an important account of the creation of a modern disease and its treatment, it is an explosive indictment of a system that is too simply materialist in both philosophy and behavior."—Harold J. Cook, Wellcome Trust Centre for the History of Medicine at University College London.
"A marvelous book: disturbing and perturbing, a book that will be widely talked about and debated. It is extraordinarily well written, balanced, witty, and engrossing. Bravo!"—Arthur Kleinman, Esther and Sidney Rabb Professor and Chair of Anthropology, Professor of Medical Anthropology, and Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard University.
"Written with Chris Lane’s brand of verve and scholarship, Shyness is a riveting book about how certain so-called illnesses are complex cultural artifacts, and certain so-called doctors are casting spells called diagnoses. A smart and bracing book about shyness—not to mention a shrewd and subtle book about psychiatric classification—is long overdue; after reading Shyness it is clear that only Lane could have written it."—Adam Phillips, psychoanalyst, author of Side Effects.
"In Shyness, Christopher Lane outlines an apparatus that is one of the most powerful cultural forces in the world today. In pulling back the drapes and revealing the bumbling and hamfistedness of the new engineers of human souls, Chris Lane might help restore sanity to Oz."—David Healy, M.D., author of Let Them Eat Prozac and The Antidepressant Era.
Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness (2007):
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0300143176/theenglishdepart
Starred review. "Having gained access to archival materials from the APA, Lane provides a behind-the-scenes look at the haphazard, unscientific process used to revise The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. . . . [A] superb, iconoclastic cultural study. . . . Highly recommended."—Library Journal.
"Lane argues in this well-researched . . . controversial book that shyness [has been] pathologized, to the detriment, especially, of children and teenagers"—Elsa Dixler, New York Times Book Review.
"Lane has exposed a very worrying problem.... Looking at this book and at recent developments in information surveillance, it appears that both Orwell's and Huxley's predictions for the future are coming true"—Martin Guha, Journal of Mental Health.
"Christopher Lane's polemical Shyness features the manipulations that promoted social anxiety disorder to a national emergency."—Frederick Crews, New York Review of Books.
"Overall, Lane's scholarly account of this saga ensures that if you're not already concerned about the over-medicalization of our mental lives, you will be."—Christian Jarrett, BBC Focus.
"A provocative look at an important chapter in the history of modern psychiatry."—Judith Graham, Chicago Tribune.
"[An] excellent new book. . . . Shyness is a welcome contribution to psychiatric discourse."—Juliet Lapidos, New York Observer.
"A detailed and searing account of the cavalier fashion in which the diagnostic and statistical manual (DSM) of mental disorder classification systems was thrown together."—Nigel Wellman, Nursing Standard.
"In his brilliant Shyness: How Normal Behaviour Became a Sickness, Christopher Lane painstakingly shows how the category of 'mental disorder' has been expanded in recent decades, so that what were once considered normal emotions or everyday foibles—shyness, rebelliousness, aloofness, and so on—have been relabelled as phobias, disorders and syndromes."—Brendan O'Neill, New Statesman and Society.
"[A] splendid book. . . Lane gives a compelling description of how shyness—once seen as a normal variation of character or personality—became incorporated into the DSM as social phobia or avoidant personality disorder."—Simon Wessely, The Lancet.
"A fascinating behind-the-scenes look at the making of the bible of modern psychiatry [that] explains how a once-ordinary affliction became a profitable disease."—Michael Agger, Mother Jones.
"The achievement of Shyness is to chart for the first time the events preceding the rise and fall of the SSRIs. Lane has marshalled a cache of unpublished data to explain the academic framework that allowed the rise to happen. [He] tells the complex story with impressive clarity. . . . Lane has done a valuable job in tracing the roots of the current crisis and he certainly isn’t calling for a reinstatement of Freudianism; what is needed now is another map to indicate a way out."—Jerome Burne, Times Literary Supplement.
"This well-written book is a thoughtful examination of shyness and its relation to psychopathology. . . . I very much enjoyed reading Lane's thought-provoking book, and would highly recommend it for psychiatry residents, graduate students in clinical psychology, and other mental health professionals in training who are interested in the field of anxiety disorders, and more broadly in psychopathology and general mental health."—Brian J. Cox, New England Journal of Medicine.
"[A] stunning and revelatory book. . . . For a book that's about the invention of a medical condition, Shyness is as riveting as a detective story. Lane writes elegantly and passionately about the need to maintain our consciousness about the maddeningly rich complexity of human emotion and thought."—Yasmin Nair, Windy City Times.
"Christopher Lane's very readable book describes the process by which aspects of human character and behaviour have been labelled as mental disorders, as illnesses which can and should be treated."—James Docherty, The Salisbury Review.
"Fascinating . . . persuasive . . ., [Shyness] should be read by anyone interested in stopping the rot in the discussion of human emotion and thought."—Helene Guldberg, Spiked Review of Books.
"There is a great deal that's interesting in this book. . . . I recommend this book as a thought-provoking and informative read."—John D. Mullen, Metapsychology.
"As Lane’s research reveals, the cost of blaming anxieties on brain chemistry imbalance goes beyond dollars, to drug dependency, debilitating side effects and consumers convinced they’re hamstrung by their physiology."—Robin Tierney, San Francisco Examiner.
"Where this book stands out . . . is in the data that Lane uses to make his case—evidence confirming once and for all that the emperor really has no clothes. Lane not only manages to gain access to the DSM archives and to previously classified drug company memos—two coups by any measure—but he also interviews key players in the DSM saga, including long-time DSM Task Force Chair Robert Spitzer himself. . . That Spitzer even agreed to be interviewed by Lane—and with such remarkable openness—left this reader, as a fellow researcher with similar interests, green with envy."—Shelley Z. Reuter, Canadian Journal of Sociology.
"[A] scathing indictment of the American Psychiatric Association. . . . Lane finds a trove of troubling (and previously unpublished) material in the APA archive and in drug company memorandums, laying bare the APA’s internal politics (as fierce as academia) and showing the growing influence of drug companies on psychiatry practice. Similarly alarming are Lane’s dissections of big pharma’s marketing of anti-depressants and description of how information about side-effects and withdrawal symptoms associated with popular prescription drugs such as Prozac and Paxil were withheld from the public. This controversial and well-documented book will spark its share of debates."—Publishers Weekly.
Lane "charges that the task force, dominated by neuropsychiatrists, often used bad science or no science at all, that it turned ordinary human emotions into diseases and that it created a climate in which pharmaceutical companies could get rich creating cures for often nonexistent complexes."—Richard Halicks, op ed, Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
"Would Henry David Thoreau and Emily Dickinson be given drugs today? In the1980s a small group of leading psychiatrists revised the profession’s diagnostic manual called the DSM for short, adding social anxiety disorder—aka shyness—and dozens of other new conditions. Christopher Lane, Miller Research Professor at Northwestern University, uses previously secret documents, many from the American Psychiatric Association archives, to support his argument that these decisions were marked by carelessness, pervasive influence from the pharmaceutical industry, academic politics, and personal ambition."—Scientific American.
"Lane . . . notes that when psychiatrists diagnose the shy as suffering from social phobia, they mistake a variation in human temperament for a mental disorder; if anything, the diagnosis only adds to the sense of unease felt by shy people. He is also right in observing that the psychiatrists’ Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), the profession’s standard 900-page reference work, errs by designating other kinds of normal human variation as mental disorders and so exaggerates the incidence of mental illness. . . [Shyness] provides vivid portraits of how DSM-III was constructed, over the course of six years, by Dr. Spitzer and a team of 15, less from ‘the concentrated energies of brilliant minds than the raucous class of a teacher whose unruly pupils won’t stay quiet.’"—Paul, McHugh, Wall Street Journal.
"Christopher Lane deconstructs the new psychiatric condition ‘social anxiety disorder’ as a creation of corporate psychiatry’s alliance with the pharmaceutical industry. He argues that shyness became a medical condition best treated by drugs as a result of battles between psychiatrists over diagnostic techniques. . . . This book compares best to Ray Moynihan and Alan Cassels’ Selling Sickness. Highly recommended for general readers, healthcare professionals and practitioners."—Choice.
"Christopher Lane . . . calls psychiatry's growing focus on children 'the perfect storm' for overdiagnosis. 'You've got a constituency—children—who cannot make informed medical decisions for themselves,' Lane says. In a fast-moving culture that heaps stress and high expectations on children, 'parents are in many cases under great pressure to ensure their child succeeds and is socially proficient. A child that doesn't negotiate rapidly those hurdles can look very quickly as if he or she is falling behind, or displaying behavior that warrants medical concern.'"—Melissa Healy, Los Angeles Times.
"This is not only an important account of the creation of a modern disease and its treatment, it is an explosive indictment of a system that is too simply materialist in both philosophy and behavior."—Harold J. Cook, Wellcome Trust Centre for the History of Medicine at University College London.
"A marvelous book: disturbing and perturbing, a book that will be widely talked about and debated. It is extraordinarily well written, balanced, witty, and engrossing. Bravo!"—Arthur Kleinman, Esther and Sidney Rabb Professor and Chair of Anthropology, Professor of Medical Anthropology, and Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard University.
"Written with Chris Lane’s brand of verve and scholarship, Shyness is a riveting book about how certain so-called illnesses are complex cultural artifacts, and certain so-called doctors are casting spells called diagnoses. A smart and bracing book about shyness—not to mention a shrewd and subtle book about psychiatric classification—is long overdue; after reading Shyness it is clear that only Lane could have written it."—Adam Phillips, psychoanalyst, author of Side Effects.
"In Shyness, Christopher Lane outlines an apparatus that is one of the most powerful cultural forces in the world today. In pulling back the drapes and revealing the bumbling and hamfistedness of the new engineers of human souls, Chris Lane might help restore sanity to Oz."—David Healy, M.D., author of Let Them Eat Prozac and The Antidepressant Era.
Monday, 15 February 2010
EVIE PRINGLE IS BACK - bought & paid for by Paxil Lawyers
The Paxil Birth Defect Litigation Update Series is sponsored by the Houston law firm of Vickery, Waldner and Mallia at www.justiceseekers.com
http://yubanet.com/opinions/Evelyn-Pringle-Paxil-Birth-Defect-Litigation---First-Trial-A-Bust-For-Glaxo.php
Evelyn Pringle: Paxil Birth Defect Litigation - First Trial A Bust For Glaxo
Published on Feb 15, 2010 - 6:47:12 AM
By: Evelyn Pringle
Feb. 15, 2010 - GlaxoSmithKline has paid out close to $1 billion to resolve lawsuits involving Paxil since the drug came on the market in1992, according to a December 14, 2009 Bloomberg report. But the billion dollars does not cover the more than 600 Paxil birth defect cases currently pending in multi-litigation in Pennsylvania.
Glaxo has settled about 10 birth defect cases, according to Sean Tracey, a Houston attorney who represented the family of a child victim in the first jury trial that decided in favor of the plaintiff on October 13, 2009, Bloomberg reports. The settlements in those lawsuits averaged about $4 million, people familiar with the cases told the new service.
First Trial A Bust for Glaxo
The first trial, in the case of Kilker v Glaxo, ended with a jury in Philadelphia finding that Glaxo "negligently failed to warn" the doctor treating Lyam Kilker's mother about Paxil's risks and the drug was a "factual
http://yubanet.com/opinions/Evelyn-Pringle-Paxil-Birth-Defect-Litigation---First-Trial-A-Bust-For-Glaxo.php
Evelyn Pringle: Paxil Birth Defect Litigation - First Trial A Bust For Glaxo
Published on Feb 15, 2010 - 6:47:12 AM
By: Evelyn Pringle
Feb. 15, 2010 - GlaxoSmithKline has paid out close to $1 billion to resolve lawsuits involving Paxil since the drug came on the market in1992, according to a December 14, 2009 Bloomberg report. But the billion dollars does not cover the more than 600 Paxil birth defect cases currently pending in multi-litigation in Pennsylvania.
Glaxo has settled about 10 birth defect cases, according to Sean Tracey, a Houston attorney who represented the family of a child victim in the first jury trial that decided in favor of the plaintiff on October 13, 2009, Bloomberg reports. The settlements in those lawsuits averaged about $4 million, people familiar with the cases told the new service.
First Trial A Bust for Glaxo
The first trial, in the case of Kilker v Glaxo, ended with a jury in Philadelphia finding that Glaxo "negligently failed to warn" the doctor treating Lyam Kilker's mother about Paxil's risks and the drug was a "factual
uksurvivors : Message: EVIE PRINGLE IS BACK - bought & paid for by Paxil Lawyers
uksurvivors : Message: EVIE PRINGLE IS BACK - bought & paid for by Paxil Lawyers
The Paxil Birth Defect Litigation Update Series is sponsored by the Houston law firm of Vickery, Waldner and Mallia at www.justiceseekers.com
http://yubanet.com/opinions/Evelyn-Pringle-Paxil-Birth-Defect-Litigation---First-Trial-A-Bust-For-Glaxo.php
Evelyn Pringle: Paxil Birth Defect Litigation - First Trial A Bust For Glaxo
Published on Feb 15, 2010 - 6:47:12 AM
Email this article Printer friendly page
By: Evelyn Pringle
Feb. 15, 2010 - GlaxoSmithKline has paid out close to $1 billion to resolve lawsuits involving Paxil since the drug came on the market in1992, according to a December 14, 2009 Bloomberg report. But the billion dollars does not cover the more than 600 Paxil birth defect cases currently pending in multi-litigation in Pennsylvania.
Glaxo has settled about 10 birth defect cases, according to Sean Tracey, a Houston attorney who represented the family of a child victim in the first jury trial that decided in favor of the plaintiff on October 13, 2009, Bloomberg reports. The settlements in those lawsuits averaged about $4 million, people familiar with the cases told the new service.
First Trial A Bust for Glaxo
The first trial, in the case of Kilker v Glaxo, ended with a jury in Philadelphia finding that Glaxo "negligently failed to warn" the doctor treating Lyam Kilker's mother about Paxil's risks and the drug was a "factual
........................
The Paxil Birth Defect Litigation Update Series is sponsored by the Houston law firm of Vickery, Waldner and Mallia at www.justiceseekers.com
http://yubanet.com/opinions/Evelyn-Pringle-Paxil-Birth-Defect-Litigation---First-Trial-A-Bust-For-Glaxo.php
Evelyn Pringle: Paxil Birth Defect Litigation - First Trial A Bust For Glaxo
Published on Feb 15, 2010 - 6:47:12 AM
Email this article Printer friendly page
By: Evelyn Pringle
Feb. 15, 2010 - GlaxoSmithKline has paid out close to $1 billion to resolve lawsuits involving Paxil since the drug came on the market in1992, according to a December 14, 2009 Bloomberg report. But the billion dollars does not cover the more than 600 Paxil birth defect cases currently pending in multi-litigation in Pennsylvania.
Glaxo has settled about 10 birth defect cases, according to Sean Tracey, a Houston attorney who represented the family of a child victim in the first jury trial that decided in favor of the plaintiff on October 13, 2009, Bloomberg reports. The settlements in those lawsuits averaged about $4 million, people familiar with the cases told the new service.
First Trial A Bust for Glaxo
The first trial, in the case of Kilker v Glaxo, ended with a jury in Philadelphia finding that Glaxo "negligently failed to warn" the doctor treating Lyam Kilker's mother about Paxil's risks and the drug was a "factual
........................
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)