There is a Bill being rammed through the legislature right now entitled Bill 95. It is a Bill that has been drafted for the (purported) purpose to “improve access to mental health services in Ontario” as apparently, we are in the midst of a “mental health crisis”. Seems to be flying below the radar.
A Bill goes through 3 readings after which, it becomes law. Bill 95 has been through 2 readings, which means it has been put forward to the legislature two times and there’s been a debate and it has been moved on to the next phase (a Bill can either move forward or it can be squashed). This Bill has one more reading and if it goes through – it’s the law… And nobody knows about it!!!
This is Bill is something right out of Communist Russia.
Let’s just jump right in to what I believe are the most important parts, or those changes that can have the biggest impact in our lives.
This one’s a biggie.
Recommendation #21: “The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care should create a task force incorporating adequate representation from among others, mental health clients and their caregivers as well as mental health law experts, to investigate and propose changes to Ontario’s mental health legislation and policy pertaining to involuntary admission and treatment. The changes should ensure that involuntary admission criteria include serious harms that are not merely physical, and that involuntary admission entails treatment. This task force should report back to the Ministry within one year of the adoption of this report by the legislative assembly.”
What does that even mean “serious harms that are not merely physical”? And who decides?
At this time, ‘involuntary admission’ currently requires that “you are a harm to yourself or others or, threatening violence”. They want to change that requirement to a threat of psychological harm. “Serious harms that are not merely physical.”
If you are an addict you could be picked up and involuntarily committed at which point there will no longer be a 72 hour wait or observation – there will be mandatory treatment and that mandatory treatment will be whatever that doctor deems appropriate. That treatment can include drugs, E.C.T. (electro-convulsive therapy – which your average Joe believes isn’t done anymore) or the newly defined (friendlier) cingulotomy*, which is really just a nicer name for lobotomy. Yes, it’s become fashionable again.
Oh, it gets better folks. A throw-away paragraph in Bill 95 is to implement “expeditiously” the recommendations of the 19 people on the 2010 Select Committee On Mental Health and Addictions**. That means “bye bye informed consent!” And here’s the kicker – you have no choice on what treatment you will receive. It’s beyond belief.
So how does that differ from the way it works now? When they follow the law (which, putting it mildly isn’t always the way – and they admit this ) the person has the right to refuse treatment as long as they are not violent or a potential harm to self or others. (IF they are deemed any of the above, a patient can be treated against his will).
The removal of informed consent means that nobody has to be consulted, nobody has to give consent. You are in deep trouble brother. The caregivers can automatically treat and “explain later”.
So here we have 19 people in place who we don’t get to choose who will arbitrarily decide the standards of treatment. They don’t even have to tell you what the treatment is going to be or its side effects and you will have no choice but to be drugged into oblivion – or shocked or cut open.
This committee dismisses utterly (but mention it in passing) the gross side effects of psychotropic drugs and the COMPLETE lack of tested efficacy of drug treatment for addiction or mental illness.
It is being proposed to remove autonomy completely. What this means is “the right to choose”. Your right to choose. So, a patient (mental or otherwise) will have no rights to decide his own fate. The current rules of the Healthcare Consent Act 1996 state that “all individuals have the right to refuse treatment as long as they pass a two pronged capacity test.”
The Select Committee believes, however, and I quote: “that the right to autonomy must be balanced with the right to be well”. WTF!?!?!
At least there was SOME outward appearance of scientific protocol. Now it’s a free for all. Psychiatrists will have full license, full liberty under the law to drug, shock, operate – anything goes. And psychiatrists can come up with (and have done so) some pretty crazy ‘treatments’.
They also recommend changing the Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004.
Recommendation #22: The task force created to investigate and propose changes to Ontario’s Mental Health legislation and policy should also investigate and propose changes to the Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004. The changes should ensure that family members and caregivers providing support to, and often living with, an individual with a mental illness or addiction have access to the personal health information necessary to provide that support, to prevent the further deterioration in the health of that individual, and to minimize the risk of serious psychological or physical harm.”
Seems innocuous. Seems legit right?
Well here’s a scenario. Nephew Fred has rich Aunt Betty, who’s in her 80’s. Aunt Betty is perfectly sane but is getting older. She is not dramatizing serious harms that are not merely physical. Or is she? What does that even mean? She’s a bit forgetful. Not so steady on her feet anymore. Fred gets access to her medical records, sees that Aunt Betty has been getting forgetful, has had a few falls and notices a couple of other problems stated in her records. So he contacts the ‘mobile crisis unit’ who come by and do an instant assessment of Aunt Betty, resulting in her being involuntary committed. Whereupon she is immediately restrained, drugged, and incarcerated in an institution and might well stay there for as long as her medical coverage continues. And in Ontario, Canada that’s a very long time. Until the day she dies.
Fred now, armed with evidence that Aunt Betty is suffering from serious harms that are not merely physical can get access to Aunt Betty’s money. She’s now safely tucked away, against her will for time immemorial. You see, she has no right to refuse treatment.
The Mental Health Act of 1974 had put an end to this kind of abuse. You know, where the husband was fed up with a wife and so had her committed. Much cheaper than a divorce and very easy to do.
On this autonomy issue. Say you have Power of Attorney over a parent AND your parent is in a nursing home. Now you would think that you would have the power to prevent harmful treatment or drugging of your parent. No you don’t. Not if this parent is deemed a serious harm that is not merely physical.
This act of the doctor ‘KNOWING BEST’ for the patient (your parent), removes YOUR ability to make those decisions. Because you represent the individual and the individual has no right to refuse treatment. They don’t have to consult you, they don’t have to get your consent.
My point is, this Act will FORCE IN TREATMENT WITH NO PROOF THAT THAT TREATMENT WILL ACTUALLY WORK. Psychiatrists readily admit that their treatments don’t cure.
I read all the time about the ‘stigma of mental illness’. What does that mean exactly? Perhaps we could say that it’s a sign of disgrace or discredit, which sets a person apart from others and remains a powerful negative attribute in social relations.
I would argue that the real stigma of mental illness is saying that mental patients haven’t got the right to choose.
Psychiatrists cringe every time they hear the violent crimes that the patients are committing – yet the majority of these patients are all on the ‘treatments’ given to them by the psychiatrists. Talk to any psych survivor. There are now at least 100 ‘psych survivor’ groups on the internet, trying to warn others about the harm done to them – in the name of ‘help’. Trying to find a reason or gain recourse for the injustices done to them by psychiatry. There are hundreds of biographies written by people who have been through the psychiatric system and somehow managed to survive. Horror stories.
And we’re going to give them this power?
You know what we SHOULD be doing? Calling for an inquiry into the cover up of deaths from psychiatric treatment. That’s what actually needs to be done.
You must get treatment, you must get treatment. There is no guarantee that their treatment does anything but line the pockets of the whole mental health industry. This is a money grab so cloaked in “we must help these people” that it makes me want to puke.
The elephant in the room is that they are enforcing something on you with absolutely NO EVIDENCE THAT IT WILL RESOLVE THE PROBLEM and in fact may kill you.
Let’s take an example. Oxi-cotin – deadly addiction. Currently a psychiatry recommended and approved treatment – methadone, paid for by our tax dollars. How is a meth addict any better than an oxi addict? How many revert? The committee keep going back to the Vancouver ‘’treatment’ laws. Have you seen the devastation in the heart of downtown Vancouver?
Like I said. It’s so Communist Russian. You can rat out your neighbor – anybody you like. Accuse them of being an addict, or mentally ill in some way, The person accused doesn’t even have to be dramatizing ANYTHING and will be immediately treated – thereby guaranteeing they are now mentally ill where they weren’t before. And the mental health industry can ring up the till in thousands of dollars in “treatment’ until you die. Which probably shouldn’t take too long, considering the treatments, and you have absolutely no right to stop them.
Because Wellness – for which there is no definition, trumps autonomy. And autonomy ladies and gentleman is our God given right. We have the right to be treated as human beings, not as a pawn in the Mental Health shell game.
At the end of the day, who the fuck are these “experts”, who have never cured anything, to decide for you and me?
**CINGULOTOMY – Is a form of psycho-surgery, introduced in 1948 as an alternative to lobotomy. Today it is used mainly in the treatment of depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder.
**2010 SELECT COMMITTEE ON MENTAL HEALTH AND ADDICTIONS – are the committee that was selected by the Lieutenent Governor (whom I know nothing about at this time, but I sure am interested).
Please write, or better yet go talk to an MPP. Use every contact you have to let them know. Our Human Rights are being taken away from us.
Here is a link to our MPPS ONTARIO.
How many children must be killed by dangerous drugs before good people take action?
Perhaps just one – if it’s your child.
Terence Young knows the tragedy of losing someone he loved. His 15 year old daughter Vanessa died far too young. She died after taking a drug called Prepulsid or Ciapride, a drug commonly used to relieve stomach discomfort or nausea, prescribed by their family doctor.
Then there is Neil Carlin’s daughter Sara, who committed suicide after taking Paxil, a drug which is known to cause suicidal ideation in young people. Also, Brennan McCartney, 18, killed himself four days after starting Cipralex, an antidepressant.
Perhaps it is fortuitous that Terence Young is a Member of Parliament, from Oakville, a Suburb of Toronto. In such a position, he is able to do more than some other parents who have experienced loss. He sponsored Bill C17, Protecting Canadians from Unsafe Drugs, aimed at tighter controls and more transparency, which was enacted on November 5, 2014. It’s commonly known as Vanessa’s Law, so named in honor of his daughter.
The law requires that healthcare institutions report serious adverse drug reactions to the Minister of Health. This is key to detecting problems with existing and new drugs. Many adverse effects may happen at home and may never be reported, but serious reactions that require medical attention will now be known and tracked. Parents continue to have responsibility to report any reactions that do not involve a hospital or clinic visit.
With enactment of the new law, the Minister of Health is empowered to require more data from drug companies and healthcare providers, require further tests or extensive studies, conduct assessments of a drug’s results, both its effectiveness and its negative reactions. It is important, on an ongoing basis, to determine whether a drug works and assess how dangerous it may be. Previously, the government’s powers to take proactive measures was limited.
In the spirit of transparency, the law allows the Minister of Health to disclose to the appropriate agencies certain business information that would have previously remained hidden. Additionally, information about clinical trials now must be made publicly available. While business confidentially is important in a competitive environment, this confidentiality cannot be prioritized above patients’ rights, health and safety.
And finally, the law empowers the government to protect the public with the ability to require labeling on dangerous drugs, to alter the way drugs and devices are used, and even to order the recall of certain drugs.
The law that Mr. Young sponsored is a step in the right direction to protect our young people from an industry that has all too often chosen profit over patient safety.
But there’s more. Mr. Young just recently announced a new online tool that makes it easier to search drug safety info Drug and Health Product Register.
Any death is heartbreaking. The death of a child, before their life has fully begun, is utterly tragic. To lose a young person in a way that’s completely avoidable, is far beyond tragic.
Though grief is undoubtedly part of his life, Terence Young is doing much more than grieve. He’s doing something effective, working hard with the hope that someday no parent will ever have to face such a tragedy.
The “industry” in question is really two industries, psychiatry/medicine and the pharmaceutical (drug) companies, along with their helpful cohorts in government which provide the funding.
In both cases, and thousands more beyond the scope of one article, these young people – children really, were given drugs with known, serious side effects. In Vanessa’s case, the side effect of Prepulsid caused cardiac arrhythmias (irregular heart rhythms). With regard to Sara Carlin and Brennan McCartney, these side effects included mania, psychosis, depression, suicidal thoughts, homicidal thoughts and death.
In the case of (supposed) mental disorders, as in the cases of Sara and Brennan, there may have been no “illness” at all. Mental disorders are defined and diagnosed only by a list of symptoms. The symptoms describe behaviors and feelings, all subjective, which are supposed to be the result of a diseased brain. Yet there are no objective medical tests that can determine whether a person has such a disorder, a condition for which dangerous drugs may be given.
These disorders cannot be detected by blood analysis, brain scan, or any form of “chemical imbalance” test, no matter how many fraudulent psychiatrists may claim that symptoms are caused by chemical imbalances.
The symptoms described are real and can be extremely disturbing. Yet, without verifiable testing, the cause of these symptoms is always unknown. This is very, very important because a number of other conditions can manifest identical symptoms – allergies, poor nutrition, extreme stress (does anyone remember high school?), hyper and hypo-thyroid conditions, hormonal issues, a plethora of genuine medical illnesses, even cancer. Before any such dangerous drugs are given, full medical testing should be done to find any underlying conditions.
Why would these “industries” set up such a system that endangers the very patients they have been trusted to help? A simple answer. Money. Psychiatric disorders are listed in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. The disorders are voted on by work groups comprised of psychiatrists. According to a 2012 report from the University of Massachusetts, “Three-fourths of the work groups continue to have a majority of their members with financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry”.
In the end though, the major responsibility for caring for our children rests with the parents. Each parent must become better informed. Each parent must be aware that diagnosis is subjective and they should seek a second opinion. Each must know that all drugs carry side effects, some of them very dangerous. Parents need to know that they do have a choice, that medical testing can detect the underlying physical cause of any symptoms, that alternative treatments are available, and that, above all, they and their children have rights to choose their own treatment options.
Thank you Mr. Young for taking effective action to protect our youth. Each and every parent can do the same for their own children, and hopefully before anything bad has to happen.
This is really, really, really great news. Now all we need are some caring, empathic, able to think for themselves, Canadian psychiatrists to implement this. Anybody know one?
The ‘Dynamic Duo’ of Leonie Fennel & Maria Bradshaw are at it again. Read on.
From Leonie’s Blog
Yesterday myself and Maria Bradshaw attended the launch of ‘The Council for Evidence Based Psychiatry’ in Westminster House. It was an absolute honour to be present at this ground-breaking initiative.
Despite a few hiccups, such as a delayed flight due to the fog in Gatwick, a very irate attendant at the ticket office, London’s tube strike and bloody Ryanair charging us an extra 140 pounds for printing 2 boarding cards; we finally made it to the launch, albeit 2 hours late and more than a little disheveled. Maria, being quite vain, wouldn’t let me take her picture as her hair wasn’t ‘quite right’ (in other words she looked decidedly frazzled). I on the other hand am used to some very dodgy photos, so had no such qualms – although the unsuspecting Peter Gøtzsche does look a little scared! Anyway back to the point:
The CEP’s mission is “To reduce psychiatric harm by communicating the latest evidence to policymakers and practitioners, by sharing the testimony of those who have been harmed, and by supporting research into areas where evidence is lacking”. Members of the CEP include psychiatrists, psychotherapists and academics. Among them are Peter Gøtzsche who co-founded the highly respected Cochrane Collaboration, James Davies, a psychotherapist, author and lecturer, and Dr. Joanna Moncrieff who is also a psychiatrist, author and Senior Lecturer in psychiatry at University College London.
In an earlier interview here, Peter was referring to the fact that prescription drugs are the 3rd leading cause of death in the western world, and said “I don’t know how people can kill so many patients in psychiatry and nobody does anything”. He estimated that Eli Lilly had caused 200,000 deaths with Zyprexa alone.
We got to meet many fabulous people yesterday, Dr Andrew Herxheimer, Dr Bob Johnson, the Earl of Sandwich and his son Luke who organised the event, to name a few. So despite all the hiccups and expense, it was worth every second to be present at the inception of this new project. I have no doubt that the CEP will change the way people view medicine and prevent many, many deaths. It’s also great to see Professor David Healy’s work being backed up by other academics in this field. Now Maria’s job, apart from finding a good hairdresser, is to persuade the CEP to come to Ireland! Find the CEP wesite here and their Twitter account here.
— There’s reassuring news for pregnant women miserable with morning sickness: A very large study in Denmark finds no evidence that using a popular anti-nausea drug will harm their babies.
Says Dr. Iffath Hoskins, a high-risk pregnancy specialist at NYU Langone Medical Center and a spokeswoman for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists……”It’s effective and it’s safe”. “Nobody is giving you a gold star for suffering through this.” CLICK HERE to read the rest of this
marketing campaign article.
It’s articles like this one, headlining in news feeds no less than 44 times (at which point I stopped counting) that could lead a mother to believe that Zofran was safe. That a drug prescribed by a professional, backed up by studies completed by specialists, recorded in scholarly medical journals, would have no adverse effects on the baby growing inside her.
A young woman recently contacted me asking if I could help her. She wants to (and is doing so herself) raise awareness regarding the adverse effects her baby suffered due to taking Zofran, prescribed for nausea, while pregnant. Hmmm…. sounds familiar – Thalidomide.
She said, ” I think you posting on your blog would offer more exposure and maybe even identify more victims in Canada. I began this journey over 13 years ago, initially believing I was the only one! My, my, my, how wrong I was”.
This unwitting mistake of mothers trusting their caretakers in believing Zofran was safe is nothing short of an irresponsible and immoral marketing campaign dreamed up by the pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline. Their purpose? Money.
Her name is Tomisha LeClair and here is her story:
In 1999, I worked through a temporary agency at Ophthalmic Consultants of Boston processing Blue Cross and Blue Shield insurance claims for the eye laser surgery center. Shortly after my hire there I became aware of my pregnancy with my daughter Ahjanee. Often times at work I became sick and tried desperately to maintain my illness as much as humanly possible. To maximize my chances of keeping my job during my pregnancy I was evaluated at the hospital and soon after I was prescribed a medication for severe nausea and vomiting.
During the same hospital visit I inquired immediately about the drug I had been prescribed and it’s safety and effectiveness. At the time of my first pregnancy with my first born, my son, this medication had not been used. When pregnant with my son in 1991, I also became dangerously ill I lost weight, diagnosed as anemic, and remained sickly throughout the pregnancy until the last trimester when I continued to struggle with morning sickness though my symptoms were never limited to mornings. At the end of the pregnancy with my son I began gaining weight and experienced less hospitalizations, and medical interventions.
Having suffered during my first pregnancy I felt a sense of relief when prescribed what was referred to as “the new wonder-drug”, Zofran and relied on its ability to safely combat the nausea. The nurses explained while administering Zofran to me intravenously. “All the midwives were taking this medication” because it showed remarkable treatment for severe hyperemesis gravidarium (literally means “excessive vomiting in pregnancy”).
While taking the Zofran pregnant with my daughter I rarely had sickness though I had still not gained a significant amount of weight and so I was told to continue taking medication as prescribed to minimize or eliminate altogether the morning sickness symptoms. As time elapsed I visited with my midwife and continued taking the medication as prescribed to reduce the symptoms. At seven months gestation I was given an ultrasound which doctors at the hospital conveyed to imply my daughter had a renal cyst; a fluid filled sac on one of her kidneys. The medical staff explained there are many children born with this complication and if necessary she could be treated with antibiotics upon birth.
It was at that juncture I was referred to genetic counseling by the same staff to explore the medical backgrounds of myself and my daughter’s father. After attending the genetic counseling session I was no closer to having answers than before I had arrived. The counselor asked many questions and explored the possibility of genetic factors which we would need to identify now, I explained that my daughter’s birth father and I both had other children though not together, still we had not uncovered anything vital and so I was closely monitored with ultrasounds and weekly visits with my midwife who continued to prescribe Zofran to me during my last trimester of pregnancy.
In May, 2000 I gave birth to my daughter Ahjanee who will turn 14 at the end of May. My labor slowly progressed because it was induced due to decreased fluid; revealed earlier that day by ultrasound after I had arrived to the labor and delivery department three weeks prior to my due date. After giving birth to Ahjanee I knew something was amiss; the medical staff did not convey much information at that time. I waited six hours to see and hold her I was then told she had a genetic syndrome called Smith Lemli Opitz syndrome. The obstetrician’s explained children diagnosed with this syndrome do not live to age 10.
A few days into our stay at the hospital, some Dr.’s approached me for consent to test my daughter’s blood for the syndrome characteristics of smith Lemli Opitz to positively confirm diagnosis. This test as explained to me would indicate whether Ahjanee’s blood revealed an elevated de-cholesterol level common in children with this syndrome. Agreeing to the test several days later I was informed the testing indicated my daughter did not have this genetic syndrome. While visiting with my daughter during her stay at the (NICU) Newborn Intensive Care Unit, and speaking daily with medical staff for updates; a new genetic syndrome had come to the minds of the Dr.’s and so they suggested my daughter Ahjanee may have Schinzel-Gideon syndrome.
Again the medical staff requested permission to perform a test this time a full body bone scan to compare Ahjanee’s bony findings to that of children with this syndrome, again I complied.
After this syndrome was ruled out, my baby was finally discharged after staying eleven days in the NICU. The geneticist’s at Children’s Hospital now proposed my daughter may be suffering from Pallister-Killian disease. This disease, Pallister-Killian caused children to have stunted dwarf-like growth, and poor circulation throughout their bodies. For the third time I agreed and consented to testing this time in the form of a brain-scan to examine my daughter’s brain size, make-up, structure, activity, and brain function. Though none of this testing was painful to Ahjanee it had a deep impact on my daily functioning due to the fact I was certain they would diagnose her with some untreatable disease or syndrome.
After three attempts to find a proper diagnosis for my daughter the genetic specialist’s told me “We are not sure what her condition is at this time, there is a strong likelihood that the problem is genetic and may take years to diagnosis”.
At this point, I began to do some research of my own to find out more about the medication I was prescribed throughout the pregnancy. After all, I had no genetic indicators in my family or the family of my daughter’s father. The fact that both he and I had other children without any genetic abnormalities I felt the Zofran was worth looking into. Discharged from the hospital after eleven days of the Newborn Intensive Care Unit, Ahjanee was given the diagnoses “multiple congenital anomalies”; meaning one born with many abnormalities.
In the latter part of 2000 I wrote to the (FDA) the Food and Drug Administration to complete a Med-Watch form reporting my daughter’s “abnormalities”. I initiated a (FOIA) a Freedom of Information Act request to the Food and Drug Administration inquiring about the adverse reactions reported by other patients who had also been prescribed this drug, to compare them to Ahjanee’s abnormalities. My suspicions were that the “wonder drug” had cause Ahjanee’s abnormality’s. Several weeks later I received a 20 page alphabetical list of all the reported adverse reactions reported by other patients, compiled into percentiles. Stunned by the findings of the adverse reactions reported list which included “every abnormality” that Ahjanee suffered from and was diagnosed with and numerous others.
One month after receiving the FOIA request I visited with the Midwife who prescribed this drug to me during my pregnancy. As we sat in her office I explained to her what my research indicated, I relayed my suspicions and the FDA report. It was then that my former Midwife confided that she had also taken the same drug during her pregnancy and had recently given birth to a son. I then inquired about the size, health, and birth gestation of her son. I suggested without knowing for certain based on my research and the FDA report her son was most likely born premature, low birth weight, with failure to thrive, and so I asked just that. When the Midwife confirmed my suspicions I pled with her to do some research of her own and in the meantime to stop prescribing the medication especially during pregnancy. The Midwife extended what appeared to be an offer of help to me and my daughter though even today I am still uncertain of just what she had in mind.
During further research I found that Zofran was originally only prescribed to chemotherapy patients suffering from nausea and vomiting due to chemotherapy radiation treatments. I noticed that somehow the drug had been classified as a Class B drug which means it is equal or as safe as Tylenol use during pregnancy. I concluded the drug manufacturer Glaxo Smith Kline had legally protected their own interests by placing a “strong caution in pregnancy” label on Zofran inserts although the same drug manufacturer is aware of the off-label uses for the medication they do nothing to prevent it from being prescribed to the pregnant.
Note: Not only did GSK protect their interests by placing a “strong caution in pregnancy” they actively promoted Zofran to pregnant women for morning sickness. See below (click for Zofran Timeline):
July 2, 2012: The U.S. Department of Justice issued a press release (pdf) stating that GlaxoSmithKline would pay a $3 billion settlement after pleading guilty to, among other claims:
Tomisha resides in Massachusetts and actively works to warn other pregnant women of the dangers of Zofran. She is also working on a bill called “Ahjanee’s Law”. If and when enacted, this bill will require medical professionals to warn patients about side effects of any medication prescribed during pregnancy prior to its prescription. She can be found on facebook at MA’Z (Mother’s Against Zofran Birth Defects).
She continues collecting signature’s for Ahjanee’s Law.
If you or anyone you know took Zofran while pregnant (in Canada only) please contact me. A journalist has asked if I could find Canadian women who took ondansetron/Zofran to treat morning sickness/hyperemesis gravidarum. He is researching/analyzing adverse reaction data relating to Health Canada’s transparency and accountability.
A month after Vanessa’s death the FDA released a statement stating that Propulsid was being pulled off the market due to the associated risk of serious cardiac arrhythmias and death; here. An Article by ‘Thomas L. Perry’ stated that Vanessa’s father was dumbfounded to read this Los Angeles Times exposé showing that the FDA and the manufacturer had known since 1993, 7 years before Vanessa’s death, that Prepulsid caused cardiac arrhythmias.
Yesterday (6th Dec 2013), the Canadian Minister for Health Rona Ambrose announced that the Canadian government is introducing new patient safety legislation, Vanessa’s Law, providing for the protection of its citizens from unsafe drugs. Minister Ambrose stated “Today, we have introduced Vanessa’s Law, a law that would protect Canadians and help ensure that no drug that is unsafe is left on store shelves.” The proposed new legislation, if enacted, will enable the Canadian Government to sanction the pharmaceutical industry for selling unsafe products, proposing fines of up to $5 million per day and even imprisonment. It further provides that the Government can compel drug companies to do further testing, to revise their labels and recall dangerous drugs.
Terence Young stated “It is difficult to overstate the impact this bill will have for Canadians who take prescription and over the counter drugs. It represents a quantum leap forward in protecting vulnerable patients and reducing serious adverse drug reactions. It is absolutely necessary to reduce deaths and injuries caused by adverse drug reactions, seventy percent of which are preventable, and will serve Canadians extremely well.”
It remains to be seen whether this bill will be enacted. If so, the Canadian Government will be the first to put their citizens before the very powerful multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical industry. Either way, I foresee strong resistance to this bill, but maybe, just maybe, this is the first major bruise on Pharma’s Achilles’ heel.
In contrast to the latter, the UK Government recently debated the suicide link associated with Roche’s ‘Roaccutane’. Again, two parents had waited 10 years to get this debate to Westminster, this time on the Roaccutane-induced ‘suicide’ of their son following a few short weeks on Roche’s notorious acne drug. Roche pulled this drug off the US market in 2009, but it’s still available in the UK and Ireland. It has been stated that Roaccutane may have caused up to 20,000 deaths. The Westminster talk can be viewed here: approx 16.27 Mins. Caroline Nokes MP looked, to all intents and purposes, like she was sucking a Roaccutane-soaked lemon. I can only hope that the promise to keep talking to these parents was well-intentioned and not just Minister’s puff.
So, the Canadian and UK Government are at least discussing prescription drug induced deaths. The Irish Government are not!
You can DO IT YOURSELF! Yes, a D.I.Y. Lobotomy.
See, I’m a big proponent of D.I.Y. Have executed countless D.I.Y. projects myself, shared many functional D.I.Y. tips on my Pinterest and Facebook accounts. I haven’t necessarily tried all of them, but I find that the ones that require no special skill, are not crazy expensive and ALWAYS get the expected result should be shared and this D.I.Y. fits all that criteria and then some. This is one of your easier D.I.Y.’s.
With a little bit of research (under one hour) you will find all the information about all the drugs that you require, but a little bit of advice from this self proclaimed D.I.Y. Diva – I would stay away from ‘accredited websites’ such as Health Canada or the FDA – they tend to never get it right. They must suppress or ignore (I really don’t know what the hell they’re doing with) actual reports from real people. This is a nightmare for D.I.Y.ers. You need to get the data from people who have actually taken (or are on) these drugs to get the real skinny. Google “I feel like a Zombie” or something like that. See what happens.
Depending on how fast you want this to come about, you may want to double or triple up on the drugs you have chosen. That’s the beauty of D.I.Y. eh? YOU control this as it’s totally dependent on your choice of drug(s) and how long you want to spend getting there.
No hospital stay or even visit, required. Easier than ever to achieve. No expensive specialists needed – you don’t even have to waste your time and (in the U.S.) money on a psychiatrist! Your family doctor will help! Just tell him what you want and he’ll write the prescription(s). It’s a D.I.Y.’ers duhreeeeaaaam!
No more ice-pick hangover! No more nasty scars or burn tissue to deal with! No more niggling fears that too much tissue will be severed (thus instantaneously rendering you a complete vegetable)! Nope, it’s a ‘steady as she goes’ process and best of all, you won’t even realize it’s happening!!!
Good luck to you. Let me know how it goes.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“These drugs impair the brain specifically by blocking the transmission to the frontal lobes of the brain…..When you give one of these drugs (Risperdal, Seroquel, Zyprexa etc.) you reduce the personhood with these drugs, even more profoundly than with the stimulant drugs (Ritalin, Adderall, Dexedrine etc.)”.
“You disable their brains. It’s a chemical lobotomy and that’s NOT a metaphor – that’s a fact”.
Dr. Peter Breggin
A documentary by Kevin P. Miller. Crucial data for parents.
Canada doesn’t appear to be as litigious as the U.S. and you don’t hear much about successful cases brought up against the Pharma giants here but I’m really hoping that this is going to change in Canada….and fast.
And it’s not that I want to see litigants become suddenly wealthy either. It’s because I want the Pharmaceutical companies to stop marketing and selling drugs that are maiming and killing people – our children in particular.
It’s been my experience that the ONLY way stop a Pharmaceutical company from doing this is to hit them where it hurts, where it costs them some money because, you see, ethics have long gone. Responsibility is non-existent and it is unfortunately the only thing that will do it.
It’s not enough for them to pull drugs off the market on account of these drugs have killed or caused kids to kill. Kids like Toran Henry from New Zealand (suicided while on Prozac) or Shane Clancey from Ireland (stabbed a boy then turned the knife on himself while on Celexa) or Brennan McCartney from Canada (suicided while on Cipralex) and thousands more.
So there’s hope here. Hope in the form of a Mr. Joseph M. Prodor, a lawyer in British Columbia who is working on a class action lawsuit* against Johnson & Johnson, makers of Risperdal.
Risperdal is an anti-psychotic and has been prescribed (off label) to boys who subsequently grew breasts due to one of the drugs side effects – elevated levels of female hormones (prolactin) . Some of these kids have to have their breasts surgically removed.
Risperdal has been approved for children for the following:
Schizophrenia- Treatment of schizophrenia in adolescents aged 13-17
Bipolar Disorder- Short term-treatment of acute manic or mixed episodes associated with Bipolar I Disorder in children and adolescents aged 10-17
Autistic Disorder- Treatment of irritability associated with autistic disorder in children and adolescents aged 5-16
Here is a clip regarding a lawsuit in the U.S. Notice how J & J caved (and settled) the lawsuit as soon as their CEO, Alex Gorsky was next to get on the stand. Wonder why?
Mr. Joseph M. Prodor a Lawyer in British Columbia, Canada, is currently collecting information from Canadians who have been affected by this medication and is going to be taking it to the courts to get it certified as a class action lawsuit.
Rapid weight gain
Tumors of the pituitary gland
Gynecomastia (breast development in males)
Decreased bone mineral density
Involuntary movement disorders (tics, twitches, muscle contractions)
Nueroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS)
For anyone in Canada wishing to join this lawsuit, please contact:
Joseph M. Prodor, Esq. (trial lawyer)
15260 Thrift Avenue
White Rock, BC V4B 2L2
Toll Free Tel: 1-877-JPRODOR (1-877-577-6367)
He will be able to take your info and direct you to someone in your province or give you instructions.
*A class action lawsuit is filed on behalf of a group of people who have been in some way injured by the actions of a company.
When someone joins a class action lawsuit, he usually has to sign papers declaring that he then forfeits the right to sue the company as an individual. A successful suit awards damages to the plaintiffs, who are those suing the company, according to greatest damage. In most cases, not all members of the suit are entitled to equal compensation.
Usually, the attorneys work on a contingency basis, which means that they will receive a portion of the award but charge their clients no fees if the suit is not successful. That portion can be high, ranging from 30% to 50% of the total award.