Posted by

[Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD:
Consider this about all research into psychiatric "diseases"-- not a single one a disease. Just as in this WSJ article, positing that the brain changes due to Ritalin/amphetamine "treatment" for ADHD, are due to ADHD--the "diseases"--so it goes throughout research in all of biological psychiatry. They always "discover" report and have press conferences and releases about brain abnormalities in one and all of the "diseases" of biological psychiatry. However, just as in ADHD/Ritalin, there is no such thing as an actual psychiatric disease (having a demonstrable physical abnormality).

However, no psychiatric "patient" escapes their drugs, their "chemical balancers" and all of their "chemical balancers" (each given for a "chemical imbalance") we know are brain/body pathogens/poisons and therefore every subtle and not so subtle (10% brain atrophy) brain change that they find with their every new diagnostic technology is real, but is due--must be due--to the drugs given the patients, voluntarily (never with valid informed consent) or court-ordered. This is why every physical side effect of every psychiatric drugs cannot be due to the disease, but must be due to the drug(s). Let me emphasize here, that all in the hierarchy of organized psychiatry and all in research know these facts to be true. All physicians know and are medicolegally responsible for knowing that a tangible abnormality = disease, and that having demonstrated no abnormality, that they have not defined a disease in the patient before them.

It was in 1970 Congressional hearings on drugs for school problems that I first encountered their claim that hyperactive child syndrome, aka, minimal brain dysfunctions was a disease. This corresponded with the birth of psychopharmacology in the 50s and 60. One can also see, in the proceedings of this hearing that the NIMH, the FDA and even HEW Secretary, Elliott Richardson had sided with this pharmaceutical industry strategy.

In The Nation, April 9, 2001, spy-novelist John le Carre wrote, insightfully: "And of all these crimes of unbridled capitalism, it seemed to me, as I began to cast round for a story to illustrate this argument in my most recent novel (The Constant Gardener), that the pharmaceutical industruy offered me the most eloquent example...Big Pharma as it is known...if Big Pharma continues unchecked on its present happy path, unbought medical opinion will be hard to find...what happens to supposedly impartia academic medical research when giant phamaceutical companies donate whole biotech buildings and endow professorships...There has been a steady flow of alarming cases in recent years where inconvenient scientific findings have been supressed or rewritten, and those resp[onsible for them hounded off their campuses with their professional and personal reputations systematically trashed..."

Throughout medicine and surgery the truth and science is bent, twisted, but in "mental health:" every bit the oxymoron "biological psychiatry" diseases are invented from thin air and treatments for these illusory, hollow contrivances are not just "prescribed" but are coerced, forced and court-ordered. And now the Congress with more Pharma lobbyists than Congressman, is set to do what science has not, never will, make psychiatric "diseases" --the same, on a par with, parity--all medical and surgical diseases. Very soon now they will vote on "mental health parity" bill in both the House and Senate; an entirely fraudulent endeavor. Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD, 8/01/02]

 Ritalin Shows Unexpected Effect in Back of Brain, Study Finds
 Thu Aug 1,12:18 AM ET

 In research that may help improve diagnosis and treatment of attention
 deficit hyperactivity disorder

[Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD:
saying "may help improve
diagnosis..." all in ADHD and biological psychiatry research know their is
no physical test for ADHD because their is no physical abnormality to test
for; the Am. Psychiatric Assoc. invented it, in committee. Saying this is
pure duplicity]

 , researchers found that the widely used
 treatment Ritalin ( news - web sites) had a surprising effect on a critical
 but little-studied portion of the brain, Thursday's Wall Street Journal

[Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD:

 . But the effect was seen only on extremely

[Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD:
as opposed to "often" or "sometimes" fidgety, to get real
quantitative and scientific as throughout "biological" psychiatry]

 Previously, research into ADHD had mostly focused on the front portion of
 the brain, responsible for higher-level thinking. But in the study,
 published today in the American Journal of Psychiatry, researchers found
 evidence of unusual activity toward the back of the brain, in a part of the
 cerebellum known as the vermis. The vermis is associated with emotional
 regulation; moreover, defects in the broader cerebellum are tied to learning

[Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD:
Here, we have their assumption that not just one or two
but all "learning disabilities" are brain diseases.]

 , which occur
 disproportionately in people with ADHD.
 Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, a technology that measures
 blood flow in the brain over a period of time, the researchers found that
 the vermis was extra-active

[Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD:
"extra-active!" Their science,
qualitation and quantitation just blows one away. This comes to us most of
all from the NIMH, authors and purveyors (through CHADD & NAMI) of the
total, 100% fraud that ADHD and all of our emotional and behavioral pains,
trials and tribulations are "brain diseases", "chemical

 in fidgety kids with ADHD. Administering
 methylphenidate, a stimulant sold under the brand name Ritalin, made by
 Novartis AG of Switzerland , decreased the activity of the vermis in these
 children, but had little effect, or even a slight increase in activity, on
 the vermis of children who were diagnosed with ADHD but who weren't
 demonstrably fidgety

[Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD:
It has been known since 1986 that Ritalin and
all of the amphetamines known to treat the illusory, invented, non-disease,
ADHD cause on-average, 10% brain atrophy, shrinkage, shriveling, in just
about all parts of the brain--especially--you guessed it--of the vermis of
the cerebellum. All ADHD researchers, espeically those at the NIMH have been
aware all this time that the brain atrophy was due not to ADHD--because
there is no such thing--but to the drugs themselves. However, from 1986 to
the present they have chosen to represent this drug-induced brain
(including cerebellar vermis) atrophy as physical evidence that ADHD is a
disease, knowing all the while it was they-themselves, with their
medications, that had induced the abnormalities they spoke of--the brain

 The study involved 10 children with ADHD, and six
 children without ADHD who weren't given Ritalin.

[Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD:
To do MRI brain
scans in 50 children with ADHD treated, with Ritalin/amphetamines, and to
compare their scans to 50 children with ADHD, never treated with stimulants
or any drugs, would have settled the ADHD or drug question years and years
ago, but the NIMH chose never to do that study, never to answer that
question, but to go on, as they have done, 1986 to the present, representing
the Ritalin-amphetamine induced brain atrophy to have been "caused" by their
ADHD. Not possible for the simple reason that ADHD does not exist--as an
actual disease. It is a ruse, a scam to make "patients" of normal children,
by the millions.]

 Wall Street Journal Staff Reporter Robert McGough contributed to this


[Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD:
See my 2 letters, below to the august, Scientific American. The
complicity of the media (WSJ) and of the peers of the "scientific"
peer-reviewed literature is evident. Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD,

Editor (mailed 9/15/98) September 14, 1998
Scientific American
415 Madison Avenue
NY, NY 10017

Re: Barkley RA. Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Scientific
American. September, 1998:66-71. (sent 9/14/98)

To the Editor,

Barkley [1], weaves illusions of disease and biology. The definition of
ADHD changes with each edition of the DSM. Thus, we have ADD [DSM-III
type, 1980], ADHD [DSM-III-R type, 1987], and, ADHD [DSM-IV type, 1994].
 From 1950-1980, there were names and acronyms galore, none with a
confirmatory physical abnormality. In a review of the neuro-imaging
research, Ernst [2], laments, "The definition of ADHD has changed over
time ...children with ADHD who were diagnosed according to DSM-III-R
(1987) criteria include children who do not meet DSM-III (1980) criteria."
I have elicited "confessions" from several researchers that ADHD has not
been validated as an actual disease.
Swanson (American Society of Adolescent Psychiatry, March, 7, 1998): " I
would like to have an objective diagnosis for the disorder (ADHD)...
psychiatric diagnosis is completely subjective."

Castellanos ( personal correspondence, May 13, 1998): "...we have not
yet met the burden of demonstrating the specific pathophysiology that we
believe underlies this condition."

Barkley, implies that brain atrophy characterizes ADHD. He cites MRI
studies by Castellanos, et al. In the first [3], "Subjects with ADHD had
a 4.7% smaller total cerebral volume." The second [4] showed: "Vermal
(cerebellar) volume was significantly less...with ADHD." Not mentioned
were the facts, acknowledged in the original report [3], that 93% of
ADHD subjects had been on chronic stimulant therapy and, that the same,
treated, cohort was used in the second study. Stimulant therapy caused
the brain atrophy. The children were normal prior to stimulant therapy.

The Nuremberg Code does not allow the abrogation of informed consent
(calling ADHD a disease) and the drugging of normal children.

Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD
1303 Hidden Mountain Dr.
El Cajon, CA 92019
fax 619 442 1932


1. Barkley RA. Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Scientific
American. September, 1998:66-71.
2. Ernst M. Neuroimaging in Attention-Deficit /Hyperactivity Disorder
(p. 95-117). In Nadeau, KG (ed), A Comprehensive Guide to Attention
Deficit Disorder in Adults. Brunner and Mazel, Inc. New York. 1995.
3. Castellanos FX, et al. Quantitative Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging
in Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry.
4. Castellanos FX, et al. Cerebellum in attention-deficit hyperactivity
disorder. Neurology. 1998; 50:1087-1093.

 Kristin Leutwyler                                       August 26,1997
 Board of Editors
 Scientific American
 415 Madison Avenue
 New York, NY 10017
 Dear Ms/Dr Leutwyler,
 It was good to visit with you by phone today to revisit the ADHD/Ritalin
issue as below.  I take it from your comments that there has been no
subsequent exploration of the crux of the controversy, which is, whether
ADHD is a disease with a characteristic, confirmatory abnormality or is
merely an illusion of a disease.
 An ally, concerned, as I am, just sent me a copy of Paying Attention (by
yourself,  Scientific American, August, 1996, page 12-14).  I was shocked
and surprised, not to find the ADHD media juggernaught/misinformation
campaign rolling on, but to find it in the pages of Scientific American.
 That the "scientists" of the National Institutes of  Health (NIH) National
Institutes of Mental Health (NIMH) and National Institute of Child and Human
Development (NICHD)  deceive the public making of ADHD the #1 pandemic of
the land before it has been validated as a disease, a medical syndrome a
phenotype (all require an objective abnormality--pathology) or anything
organic or biologic should no longer surprise us.  That Scientific American,
checking both  scientific method and scientific questioning at the door,
should be seduced, is truly shocking.
 It is really very simple.  The controversy that the usual cast of ADHD
"experts" with their   pre-scripted, anti-scientific defenses, say exists,
can be cleared up in no time at all.  We have an estimated 10 percent of US
schoolchildren (5.23 million) on dangerous, addictive psycho-stimulants and
other mind-altering drugs for this dread  "disease" with its dread
"prognosis" (pg 7 of NIH Publication 94-3572 from the NIMH alludes to those
with ADHD as having a "disease").
 What if ADHD was not a disease at all, or a medical  syndrome or anything
organic or biological.  What if, after 17 years of ADD (and ADHD) it was
still "theoretical" with it's biological basis still "about to be
elucidated."  This would mean, would it not, that the 5 million plus, ADHD
schoolchildren are medically, biologically normal--that they have no disease
with no prognosis.  It means instead, as all of their research is carefully
designed not to show, that their grim prognosis,  including educational,
social and vocational failure, psychoactive substance abuse, and all of the
"co-morbidities, are  not the prognosis of ADHD at all, but rather, the
result of the thorough, permanent medicalizing of the children: the
stigmatizing labels, the preempting of literacy and an education, their
"disability" designation and the near-mandatory use of quiescence-assuring
medication throughout their school-days.
 Consider the NIMH-Castellanos research on MRI brain scanning in ADHD,
considered at some length in your article.  What did it actually show?
 The authors found  "significantly" smaller (4.7%) cerebral  and cerebellar
volume (as well as  loss of normal right left caudate asymmetry and reduced
right caudate volume) in the 57 with ADHD, than in the 55 "healthy" control
subjects (Arch Gen Psych. 1996;53:607-616).
  Castellanos, et al, concluded " This first comprehensive morphometric
analysis is consistent with hypothesized dysfunction of the right sided
pre-frontal-striatal systems in ADHD."
 However, buried within the "Comment" section of their report, was the only
plausible conclusion, given that ADHD is not a disease, a medical syndrome,
a phenotype or anything organic or biological:  "Because almost all (93%)
subjects with ADHD had been exposed to stimulants,  we cannot be certain
that our results are not drug-related."
 For the past three years I have been asking  NIMH, ADHD experts,
Castellanos, Zametkin, Rapoport, Jensen and others, to "refer me the article
or articles in the peer-reviewed literature that establishes that ADHD has a
confirmatory, characteristic physical   abnormality (pathology) validating
it as a disease, a medical syndrome, a phenotype, or anything organic or
biologic."  Although I have written each of them more than one time, the
last time by registered mail, I have yet to get an answer from any one of
them.  Since when can scientists, worthy of the name, decline to answer
fundamental questions.  Perhaps you can get an answer to this fundamental
 However, the FDA and the DEA were responsive.  On December 12, 1994, Dr.
Paul Leber of the Division of Neuropharmacological Drug Products of the FDA,
wrote "We acknowledge that the condition currently known as ADHD has been
historically controversial and that as yet no distinct pathophysiology for
the disorder has been delineated.  The same acknowledgement came from Gene
R. Haislip of the Office of Diversion Control of the DEA in a letter dated
October 25, 1995: "We are also unaware that ADHD has been validated as a
biologic/organic syndrome or disease."
 Having given coverage to the controversy, you have a duty to science and
medicine to ask the hard questions.  There cannot be a  different standard
of science for biopsychatry.  What we have, it seems, is millions of normal
children having their schooling and lives medicalized, for profit.  Moreover
they are being made to take drugs known to be addictive, and, as strongly
suggested by the Castellanos research, brain damaging, otherwise, as well.
 Please join me in trying to garner the answers to fundamental questions
necessary to get to the bottom of the US, ADHD/Ritalin controversy.  The US
consumes 90% of the world's supply of Ritalin with 90% of it given to our
children.  Ritalin use here is rising 75-80% per year, Dexedrine
(d-amphetamine) 100% per year.   There is no shortage of hard questions to
be asked.  However, the "ADHD: Is it a disease, a syndrome of anything
biologic or organic?" remains the most fundamental of all, and the most
difficult to get a straight answer on.
 Sincerely yours,
 Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD
 1303 Hidden Mountain Drive
 El Cajon, CA 92019
 619 440 8236 (p)
 619 442 1932 (f)
 PS Their credentials and mine which they regularly try to make the issue,
do not change the need for answers to these questions.
 CC       Xavier Castellanos MD
 10 Center Drive
 Room 6N240
 Bethesda, MD 20892-1600
 enclosure:  Future of Mental Health (3)
             What Every Parent Needs to Know About ADD (2)

Leave a Reply

  • (will not be published)