Posted by & filed under Uncategorized.

To Science Times Editor

New York Times 


Re: Drugs to Treat ADHD Reach the Preschool Set—

New York Times, Health, D-5, 10/25/11.




By Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD, 10/19/11


In 2008, I helped the Canadian father of court-ordered, psychiatrically- “diagnosed,” “drugged,” 12 year-old boy write a letter to Health Canada (counterpart of our U.S. FDA) asking if ADHD and other psychiatric ‘disorders’ and ‘chemical imbalances’ of the brain were actual diseases/physical abnormalities


In a letter dated November 10, 2008, Supriya Sharma, MD MPH FRCPC, Director General of Health Canada, responded.  “For mental/psychiatric disorders in general, including depression, anxiety, schizophrenia and ADHD, there are no confirmatory gross, microscopic or chemical abnormalities that have been validated for objective physical diagnosis.  Rather, diagnoses of possible mental conditions are described strictly in terms of patterns of symptoms that tend to cluster together; the symptoms can be observed by the clinician or reported by the patient or family members.” 


Similarly, I wrote the FDA.   Responding on 3/12/08, Donald Dobbs wrote: “This is in response to your letter dated December 19, 2008, requesting the reference/citation from the scientific/medical literature that the five psychiatric disorders listed in your letter are actual diseases…I consulted with the FDA New Drug Review Division and they concurred with the response you enclosed from Health Canada.   Psychiatric disorders (as Health Canada refers) are diagnosed based on a patient’s presentation of symptoms that the larger psychiatric community has come to accept as real and responsive to treatment.  We have nothing more to add to Health Canada’s response.  Sincerely, Donald Dobbs, Consumer Safety Officer, Division of Drug Information Office of Training and Communications Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.”


It should come as no surprise that the chairman of this new, 4-18 years of age, ADHD guidelines, Mark Wolraich, MD, of the University of Oklahoma, is a consultant to Shire Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Shinogi, and Next Wave Pharmaceuticals, or that the AAP itself has received millions in pharmaceutical funding—In 2011,they received $30,000 from Pfizer; $100,000 from Eli Lilly; and $79,650 from Merck. In 2010, they received $297,750 from Pfizer; $100,000 from Merck; and $3,000 fromShire. Between 2008 and 2009, AAP received another $69,000 from Pfizer.  Nor is this the first time the AAP has come under fire for promoting a pharmaceutical agenda – in 2008, they were exposed for their financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry, when the academy issued guidelines recommending statins (cholesterol lowering drugs) for kids, after it was disclosed they had received substantial contributions from pharmaceutical companies with ties to statins, including $433,000 from Merck$835,250 from Abbott Laboratories’ Ross Product Division and $216,000 from the Bristol-Myers Squibb company Mead Johnson Nutritionals. 


US pediatricians cannot have it both ways.  Either they advocate for the infants and children who are their patients or they straddle the ethical-moral divide making ‘patients’ of normal children, then poisoning them, while lying to and betraying their trusting parents and families.  


When trusted physicians, trustworthy no more, knowingly call normals “abnormal” and poison them, calling it “treatment” they have become predators.


When will the public awaken to the total, 100 percent fraud and deception that is “biological psychiatry”—that which claims that all psychological and psychiatric ‘disorders’ listed in their Diagnostic and Statistical Manual and International Classification of Diseases (ICD) are diseases, just as in the rest of medicine, when none of them are, Not one.  But the illusions are powerful.  After all, they are doctors, they went to medical school.  They wouldn’t lie to us—would they?  We have no recourse but to trust.  Yes—and they know it.


Every child at one time or another, or recurrently throughout childhood manifests all of the ‘characteristics’ of so-called ADHD and of any number of psychiatric ‘disorders.’  That is exactly as planned.  There plan, as should be perfectly clear witnessing their latest ADHD ‘Guideline’ is to label as ‘abnormal’/ ‘diseased’, all the children of the world and sell and give drugs for them all for the length of their unnatural lives (nowhere do they speak of the horrendous rates of addiction or of the fact that the rate of sudden cardiac death on Ritalin, Adderall and the stimulants generally, is increased by 700%).




Posted by & filed under Uncategorized.

In the first half of 2008,4 Charleston WV-area veterans were found dead in their sleep.  They were wide awake when when they retired.  Each was said to have PTSD and was on Seroquel, an antipsychotic, Paxil, an SSRI antidepressant, and Klonopin, a Valium-like benzodiazepine.  Antipsychotics, such as Seroquel and Risperdal—those most widely used in the military–are known to prolong the QT interval (as measured on an electrocardiogram) leading to lethal arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death.  I have learned that Seroquel, never approved by the FDA for the treatment of PTSD or as a sleeping aid, is, nonetheless, widely used throughout the military as a ‘sleeping aid.’  It may, in fact be the military’s ‘sleeping aid’ of choice.  US Central Command policy allows troops a 90 or a 180 day supply of psychotropic drugs before they deploy and endorses Seroquel as a ‘sleep aid’ in doses of 25 or 50 mg.  A June, 2010  report from Department of Defense Pharmecoeconomic Center showed 213,972 or 20% of the 1.1 million active duty troops surveyed were on one or more psychiatric drugs.  I have heard a credible estimate that as many as 90 percent of all soldiers are on one or more psychiatric drugs.  From 2000 to 2010, the Department of Veterans Affairs spent $717 million for the antipsychotic risperidone (Risperdal) alone. In fiscal year 2007 the VA spent $89 million for 467,217 risperidone prescriptions and $92 million for 740,317 Seroquel prescriptions. Is Seroquel part of that 90 or 180 day supply given to all soldiers as they deploy?  Googling ‘dead in bed,’ ‘…in barracks,’ ‘collapses and dies’ ‘collapses and dies after run,’ ‘…after drill,’ we have found, to date, 247 probable sudden cardiac deaths and 63 possible sudden cardiac deaths (SCD). We have given names and such details as have  allowed these conclusions to the Surgeon General of the Army, Eric B. Schoomaker, and to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, and Veterans Affairs Committees.  A paper by Krystal et al, in the August 2, 2011 Journal of the American Medical Association concluded: “treatment with risperidone compared to placebo did not reduce symptoms.”   Laura Woodin, a spokeswoman for the U.S. division of London-based AstraZeneca, which makes Seroquel, said the drug is not approved by the FDA as a sleep aid or to treat post-traumatic stress disorder. The status of sudden cardiac death in the military will be discussed.

Posted by & filed under Uncategorized.

To the Editor:  (431 words)


Re: Sunday Dialogue: Curing the Health System

Sunday Review, page 2, August 28, 2011


Please publish as an OpEd:


To fully understand why the costs of medical care in the US are twice those of Western Europe and Canada leaving 50 million uninsured, uncared for, one must figure-in the costs of the “selling sickness”–of inventing diseases and whole epidemics out of thin air, which incidentally, is the title of a 2005 book by Ray Moynihan and Alan Cassels (Selling Sickness—How the World’s Biggest Pharmaceutical Companies are Turning Us All Into Patients, Nation Books).  Moynihan and Cassels give examples aplenty but cannot keep up with the industry’s disease-inventors and neglect to drive home the point that US psychiatry reigns supreme with none of the 374 ‘disorders,’ ‘chemical imbalances’ described in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-IV, (published by the American Psychiatric Association) being actual physical abnormalities—diseases, the rightful target of diagnosis and treatment of ethical, scientific physicians.  Consider that as of 2007 we had 5.4 million children said to have the wholly fictitious, fraudulent, disease ADHD, up an astounding 22% from 2003 to 2007, to nearly one in ten school age children. Using the 2005 prevalence rate of 5%, the Center for Disease Control estimated that the annual societal ‘‘cost of illness’’ for ADHD was between $36 and $52 billion, in 2005 dollars–between $12,005 and $17,458 annually per individual—this for just one invented disease—a small part of the cost of allowing ourselves to be decieved.  What must be factored in is the costs of all of psychiatry’s 374 invented diseases, bound to rise astronomically again with the coming, 2013, publication of their much “fatter” by far DSM-V.  In 1976, Henry Gadsden, CEO of pharmaceutical giant, Merck, told Fortune magazine of his distress that their potential markets had been limited to sick people—people proved to have a disease.  Suggesting he’d rather Merck be more like chewing gum maker Wrigley’s, Gadsden said it had long been his dream to make drugs for healthy people.  Because then, Merck would be able to “sell to everyone.”  This is what we pay for today—collectively a fraud.  If we are ever to have affordable health for all we must recognize and expunge all invented, fraudulent, never-necessary diagnosis and treatment. 

Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD

Posted by & filed under Uncategorized.

Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD responding to

No Cause for Marijuana Case, but Enough for Child Neglect, By MOSI SECRET New York Times August 17, 2011. (see article below)


We point our finger at China and accuse them kidnapping and selling their citizen’s children.  How is this different? Ten grams of marijuana found in Penelope Harris’s apartment, belonging, not to her, but to a boyfriend—to little to bring misdemeanor charges and yet she was reported to the New York state child welfare system who’s caseworkers swept in and took her children away.  Granted they didn’t jail Ms. Harris but her son, 10 spent more than a week in foster care and her niece, 8, was not returned to her for a year.  Ms. Harris, 31, had to weather a lengthy ‘child neglect’ inquiry, though she had no criminal record and had never before been investigated by the child welfare authorities. Hundreds of New Yorkers who have been caught with small amounts of marijuana, or who have simply admitted to using it, have become ensnared in ‘child neglect’ cases  though they had not faced even the least of criminal charges.  No criminal act, no conviction–less than 25 grams of marihuana—insufficient for a misdemeanor charge and yet ‘government’ in the form of the wholly out-of-control child welfare agency, takes—kidnaps–your child, your children for no specified or determined duration your children remain out or your reach and control subject only to the whim of the agency and its collaborating foster care networks, courts and psychiatrists.

Who stands most to benefit from this ‘brave new world’ arrangement?  An estimated 730,000 New Yorkers use for a host of things psychological and physical such as a painful tooth, the nausea of chemotherapy, anxiety, depression or grieving.  And those who use it consider it as safe and inexpensive as any prescription medication including any psychiatric drugs, requiring a visit to a psychiatrist, a GP or internist.  Psychiatry and the pharmaceutical industry benefit from a just such a government-directed, government-enforced program that stands ready to steal your children, labeling and drugging them, preparing them for ‘adopting out,’ never to see their natural or first adoptive parents again. 

What’s more in 50 to 60 percent foster children nation-wide are managed by giving them one or several prescription drugs—psychiatric drugs—as if being a foster child was a medical condition instead of a grave misfortune.

I suggest that the history of the agencies that do this for New York City, New York State, and all cities and states, be scrutinized.  They have positioned themselves—not by accident I am sure–to criminalize all 730,000 New Yorkers who use marihuana at least once annually and while they may not charge, try and sentence the adult who uses marihuana they may kidnap your child, sell and drug that child for profit to foster care, to psychiatry and to the pharmaceutical industry and sell it again ‘adopting it out’—always with psychiatric labels, on psychiatric drugs, but of course, never cured.  


(original article)

August 17, 2011

No Cause for Marijuana Case, but Enough for Child Neglect


The police found about 10 grams of marijuana, or about a third of an ounce, when they searched Penelope Harris’s apartment in the Bronx last year. The amount was below the legal threshold for even a misdemeanor, and prosecutors declined to charge her. But Ms. Harris, a mother whose son and niece were home when she was briefly in custody, could hardly rest easy.

The police had reported her arrest to the state’s child welfare hot line, and city caseworkers quickly arrived and took the children away.

Her son, then 10, spent more than a week in foster care. Her niece, who was 8 and living with her as a foster child, was placed in another home and not returned by the foster care agency for more than a year. Ms. Harris, 31, had to weather a lengthy child neglect inquiry, though she had no criminal record and had never before been investigated by the child welfare authorities, Ms. Harris and her lawyer said.

“I felt like less of a parent, like I had failed my children,” Ms. Harris said. “It tore me up.”

Hundreds of New Yorkers who have been caught with small amounts of marijuana, or who have simply admitted to using it, have become ensnared in civil child neglect cases in recent years, though they did not face even the least of criminal charges, according to city records and defense lawyers. A small number of parents in these cases have even lost custody of their children.

New York City’s child welfare agency said that it was pursuing these cases for appropriate reasons, and that marijuana use by parents could often hint at other serious problems in the way they cared for their children.

As states and localities around the country loosen penalties for marijuana, for both recreational and medical uses, they are increasingly grappling with how to handle its presence in homes with children. California, where the medical marijuana movement has flourished, now requires that child welfare officials demonstrate actual harm to a child from marijuana use in order to bring neglect cases, and defense lawyers there say the authorities are now bringing fewer of them.

But in New York, the child welfare agency has not shied from these cases. For these parents, the child welfare system has become an alternate system of justice, with legal standards on marijuana that appear to be tougher than those of criminal courts or, to some extent, of society at large. In interviews, lawyers from the three legal services groups that the city hires to defend parents said they saw hundreds of marijuana cases each year, most involving recreational users.

The lawyers said they currently had more than a dozen cases on their dockets involving parents who had never faced neglect allegations and whose children were placed in foster care because of marijuana allegations.

Lauren Shapiro, director of the Brooklyn Family Defense Project, which defends most parents facing neglect charges in Family Court in Brooklyn, said more than 90 percent of the cases alleging drug use that her lawyers handle involve marijuana, as opposed to other drugs.

“There is not the same use of crack cocaine as there used to be, so they are filing these cases instead,” Ms. Shapiro said.

Marijuana is the most common illicit drug in New York City: 730,000 people, or 12 percent of people age 12 and older, use the drug at least once annually, according to city health data.

Over all, the rate of marijuana use among whites is twice as high as among blacks and Hispanics in the city, the data show, but defense lawyers said these cases were rarely if ever filed against white parents.

Michael Fagan, a spokesman for the Administration for Children’s Services, said the defense lawyers were offering a simplistic portrayal of these cases.

“Drug use itself is not child abuse or neglect, but it can put children in danger of neglect or abuse,” Mr. Fagan said. “We think the argument that use of cocaine, heroin or marijuana by a parent of young children should not be looked into or should simply be ignored is just plain wrong.”

Mr. Fagan said most of the cases involved additional forms of neglect, like a child who is not going to school or who has been left unattended.

“In other times, we find that admitted marijuana use masks other substance abuse,” Mr. Fagan said.

But lawyers for parents countered that the agency often brought neglect charges based solely on recreational marijuana use, then searched later for other grounds to bolster cases.

“In some cases, there are other allegations, but we think they are add-ons,” said Susan Jacobs, executive director of the Center for Family Representation, which works in Manhattan and Queens. “The reason the person is being brought into Family Court is the marijuana use.”

Ms. Jacobs cited the case of a former client, Jose Gunnell, 23, of Harlem, who lost custody of his 1-year-old daughter in March after an employee at a homeless shelter where he was staying found a $5 bag of marijuana in his room during an inspection.

Mr. Gunnell said in an interview that he stopped smoking marijuana in 2010 but that he used it again in March after having an infected tooth pulled. “The wound wouldn’t close,” he said. “I was getting hungry, but I couldn’t eat. I bought weed.”

The neglect petition that the Administration for Children’s Services filed against Mr. Gunnell shows that he admitted to smoking marijuana to develop an appetite.

The agency’s petition also said that his daughter did not always have adequate clothing, that shelter workers once smelled alcohol on Mr. Gunnell’s breath and that his room was dirty and had an odor.

The agency would not comment on Mr. Gunnell’s case or on others described by defense lawyers, citing confidentiality rules.

Ms. Jacobs acknowledged that the Administration for Children’s Services might at times correctly determine that marijuana use was one of many serious problems in a family, but she contended that those were only a minority of the cases.

State law makes possession of as much as 25 grams of marijuana — enough for 20 or 30 marijuana cigarettes — a violation similar to a traffic offense, punishable by a fine of up to $100. The Administration for Children’s Services does not track the number of parents facing marijuana allegations. It compiles statistics only on the total number of neglect cases for drugs and alcohol, rather than for individual drugs. There were 4,891 such cases in 2010.

State law considers a child neglected if his or her well-being is threatened by a parent who “repeatedly misuses” a drug. But the law does not distinguish marijuana from heroin or other drugs. The law says that if parents have “substantial impairment of judgment,” then there is a presumption of neglect, but it does not refer to quantities of drugs.

Furthermore, the law does not require child welfare authorities to catch parents while they are high or with drugs in their possession. Simply admitting past use to a caseworker is grounds for a neglect case.

In marijuana cases, as in all others, caseworkers have the obligation to remove children who they believe are in imminent danger, but they can recommend that the agency file neglect charges against the parents without removing the children. They can also close cases for unsubstantiated allegations.

Neglect findings, while sometimes allowing parents to keep their children, can have serious repercussions. They prohibit parents from taking jobs around children, like driving a school bus or working in day care, or from being foster care parents or adopting. And they make it easier for Family Court judges to later remove children from their homes.

The findings stay on parents’ records with the Statewide Central Register until their youngest child turns 28.

The policy of the Administration for Children’s Services to pursue marijuana cases is not widely known. But when told of it, some lawmakers said the agency was overstepping its authority.

“I would hope that A.C.S., knowing what a wide-net strategy the N.Y.P.D. is using, would treat marijuana arrests with a grain of salt,” said Brad Lander, a Democratic city councilman from Brooklyn. “A neglect charge should not be leveled.”

Ms. Harris, the woman briefly held in custody in the Bronx, said the police had searched her apartment because they believed drugs were being sold there, an allegation that she denied. She said the small bags of marijuana the police found belonged to her boyfriend and were for his personal use. She tested negative for drugs after she was released.

The Administration for Children’s Services filed neglect charges about a week after Bronx prosecutors declined to press charges. Ms. Harris was represented by the Bronx Defenders, a nonprofit organization that provides legal assistance to Bronx residents.

In a hearing the next day, the agency agreed to return Ms. Harris’s son on the condition that her boyfriend not return to the home, that she enroll in therapy and submit to random drug screenings, and that caseworkers could make announced and unannounced visits to her home. Ms. Harris’s case was closed in April without a finding of neglect.


Posted by & filed under Uncategorized.

Op/Ed Editor

New York Times


To the Editor


Re: On Anniversary of Attack, Many New Yorkers Will Try Not to Dwell on It. New York, 9/10/11, A-15]


Ordinarily, when faced with adversity or tragedy, the prevailing urge, is to go forward, to regroup to prevail.  But as one looks at the protracted, orchestrated mourning surrounding ‘9/11’ it seems clear that something else is going—the mongering of PTSD, clinical depression, severe anxiety disorder (SAD), etc., etc., etc.—psychiatry’s bogus ‘diseases’–all of them pushed shamelessly, non-stop, for no purpose but to sell psychiatric drugs—the new way in the US and around the world to deal with sadness, grief, the blues, anxiety, tension, sleeplessness, forgetfulness—you name it.  We have let psychiatry owned and operated by the pharmaceutical industry replace our every natural emotion and behavior with their ‘chemical imbalance,’ ‘disease,’ ‘disorder’ fabrications.  They rush in, as they did on ‘9/11,’right behind the ambulances to append their acronyms each needing a prescription or prescriptions.  Thus it is we are treated to a 9/11 witness (having lost no one himself) tearful at re-creation of the scene, convinced, no doubt that having PTSD that is what he is to do without end. Thank goodness for Secretary of Defense, Hillary Clinton and her plain and simple admonition to take a moment but get over it and move forward.  This is what Laurel Wells and the “Many New Yorkers” in this article (consigned to an inside page) have opted to do—not join the scheduled mourning. Many in our Armed Forces ordered to accept their psychiatric ‘diagnoses’ and ‘treatments’ have learned that the adverse effects of psychiatric drugs are far worse than going the will-power route when it comes to successfully dealing with tragedy and getting back to normal—something psychiatry and Big Pharma would rather you not do.