Quote:
by Moritz Nestor

Fortunately, the Swiss National Advisory Commission on Biomedical Ethics (NEK, President: Otfried Höffe) critically commented on the use of the ADHD drug Ritalin in its opinion of 22 November 2011 titled Human enhancement by means of pharmacological agents1: The consumption of pharmacological agents altered the child’s behavior without any contribution on his or her part.

That amounted to interference in the child’s freedom and personal rights, because pharmacological agents induced behavioral changes but failed to educate the child on how to achieve these behavioral changes independently. The child was thus deprived of an essential learning experience to act autonomously and emphatically which “considerably curtails children’s freedom and impairs their personality development”, the NEK criticized.


The alarmed critics of the Ritalin disaster are now getting support from an entirely different side. The German weekly Der Spiegel quoted in its cover story on 2 February 2012 the US American psychiatrist Leon Eisenberg, born in 1922 as the son of Russian Jewish immigrants, who was the “scientific father of ADHD” and who said at the age of 87, seven months before his death in his last interview:


“ADHD is a prime example of a fictitious disease”2

Since 1968, however, some 40 years, Leon Eisenberg’s “disease” haunted the diagnostic and statistical manuals, first as “hyperkinetic reaction of childhood”, now called “ADHD”. The use of ADHD medications in Germany rose in only eighteen years from 34 kg (in 1993) to a record of no less than 1760 kg (in 2011) – which is a 51-fold increase in sales! In the United States every tenth boy among ten year-olds already swallows an ADHD medication on a daily basis. With an increasing tendency.3


When it comes to the proven repertoire of Edward Bernays, the father of propaganda, to sell the First World War to his people with the help of his uncle’s psychoanalysis and to distort science and the faith in science to increase profits of the industry – what about investigating on whose behalf the “scientific father of ADHD” conducted science? His career was remarkably steep, and his “fictitious disease” led to the best sales increases. And after all, he served in the “Committee for DSM V and ICD XII, American Psychiatric Association”4 from 2006 to 2009. After all, Leon Eisenberg received “the Ruane Prize for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Research. He has been a leader in child psychiatry for more than 40 years through his work in pharmacological trials, research, teaching, and social policy and for his theories of autism and social medicine”.5

And after all, Eisenberg was a member of the “Organizing Committee for Women and Medicine Conference, Bahamas, November 29 – December 3, 2006, Josiah Macy Foundation (2006)”.6 The Josiah Macy Foundation organized conferences with intelligence agents of the OSS, later CIA, such as Gregory Bateson and Heinz von Foerster during and long after World War II.
Have such groups marketed the diagnosis of ADHD in the service of the pharmaceutical market and tailor-made for him with a lot of propaganda and public relations? It is this issue that the American psychologist Lisa Cosgrove and others investigated in their study Financial Ties between DSM-IV Panel Members and the Pharmaceutical Industry7. They found that “Of the 170 DSM panel members 95 (56%) had one or more financial associations with companies in the pharmaceutical industry. One hundred percent of the members of the panels on ‘Mood Disorders’ and ‘Schizophrenia and Other Psychotic Disorders’ had financial ties to drug companies. [...] The connections are especially strong in those diagnostic areas where drugs are the first line of treatment for mental disorders.”8 In the next edition of the manual, the situation is unchanged. “Of the 137 DSM-V panel members who have posted disclosure statements, 56% have reported industry ties – no improvement over the percent of DSM-IV members.”9 “The very vocabulary of psychiatry is now defined at all levels by the pharmaceutical industry,” said Dr Irwin Savodnik, an assistant clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of California at Los Angeles.10


This is well paid. Just one example: The Assistant Director of the Pediatric Psychopharmacology Unit at Massachusetts General Hospital and Associate Professor of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School received “$1 million in earnings from drug companies between 2000 and 2007”.11


In any case, no one can easily get around the testimony of the father of ADHD: “ADHD is a prime example of a fictitious disease.”


The task of psychologists, educators and doctors is not to put children on the “chemical lead” because the entire society cannot handle the products of its misguided theories of man and raising children, and instead hands over our children to the free pharmaceutical market. Let us return to the basic matter of personal psychology and education: The child is to acquire personal responsibility and emphatic behavior under expert guidance – and that takes the family and the school: In these fields, the child should be able to lead off mentally. This constitutes the core of the human person. http://www.currentconcerns.ch/index.php?id=1608

(05-17-2013, 01:14 PM)rie Wrote: The article does not show that ADHD is fictitious. What this article does is to make inferences based on political affiliations. The diagnosis in its original form is now in a sense fictitious.The understanding and diagnostic criteria has shifted dramatically from its initial form due to advances in research and in testing such as neuro-imaging and psychological testing.


1) All medical doctors & psychologists may receive gifts from pharma:
Medical doctors in general are allowed to receive $3,000 in gifts from pharma companies, not just psychiatrists.

2) DSM is a diagnostic guide, it does nothing to inform treatment:
The utility of DSM diagnosis really is limited and the community will tell you this (except psychiatrists but I've met those who believe treating symptoms do not help people). Thanks to the two individuals mentioned in this article (Bateson and von Foerester), a new type of psychology arose that believes that pathologization does more harm than good, that we cannot treat people on that level of 'illness'. Many professionals don't agree with DSM-V and these new diagnoses but we're bound to be versed in them due to our ethical obligations. But treatment is a whole other issue.

3) Using DSM-based symptom check-lists is the worst possible way to diagnose ADHD:
I've tested many children and adults for ADHD and it is a long process of cognitive and neurlogical test. The fact is, there are clear patterns of cognitive 'deficits' that occur in a person with ADHD. Doing symptom check lists does not particularly yield good results but that is how psychiatrists tend to make their diagnosis bc they are not allowed to do psych testing (that privilege is for psychologists bc we are trained to do so).

4) One person's perspective (the author of this article) hopefully will not dissuade you from making informed decisions:
Please do not dismiss ADHD as a fiction, merely bc of political or conspiracy views. Children with moderate to severe ADHD are at increased risk for drug addiction (e.g., self medicating with amphetamines such as meth/speed, since that's basically similar to ADHD meds), major depression, and lower standards of life (e.g., school drop out, unemployment, etc.,) when untreated. There are many treatment options other than psychotropic medication. Such medications may impact your children's development in the long run. There are many options.

5) Accurate diagnoses may be done through neuro-cognitive psychological testing:
Misdiagnosis is rampant, too. The fact is, ADHD is over-diagnosed by under or non qualified persons in the medical/mental health industry. I worked with someone who was diagnosed ADD and taking Ridilin (via psychiatrist) but he was not getting better. Did a whole battery of testing and the results came out as something completely different. Children are overdiagnosed bc these testing is not readily available to them - poor and erroneous diagnoses are made by ticking symptoms on a symptom check-list and teacher/parents' conviction that the child is ill.

6) So basically...
If you are a parent or caregiver of a children who are experiencing difficulties in school or work, I recommend comprehensive psychological testing. That is the only accurate way to really say whether person has cognitive challenges. It can be costly but if you think about the long-term, it's worth it. You don't need to put children on medication (that is a personal choice but it's something that needs to be well thought out). Consult with a therapist or school psychologist who specializes in this area. I have met children who do not go on medication. Their parents put in a lot of effort to guide the children. It's very laborious but it's love.

Apologies for going on and on but I feel it my duty to be cautious about such claims as something being fictitious without no evidence to support such claims.

(05-17-2013, 06:44 PM)rie Wrote: Unfortunately, we do not live in a society that is amenable to these particular ways.

Quote:What does exist is the experience of people who have accurate diagnoses (which should be around 6% of children in the US) who are experiencing debilitating distress and disability due to being wired differently.

(05-18-2013, 01:15 AM)Spaced Wrote: The weird thing is that last D, by labelling it as a disorder it makes it sound like something that needs to be corrected so that the afflicted can return to social order.

(05-19-2013, 10:28 PM)Guardian Wrote: Most ADHD can be attributed to a combination or one or more of the following:

1. Toxicity - preservatives..

(05-31-2013, 12:12 AM)zenmaster Wrote:

(05-19-2013, 10:28 PM)Guardian Wrote: Most ADHD can be attributed to a combination or one or more of the following:

1. Toxicity - preservatives..

Which preservatives cause most ADHD?