N America has sadly largely created this and treatment answers r handed over to big pharma. Health care's greatest failure, or should i say, saddest is its management/diagnosis of mental illness. See, a significant treatment modality is pharmacology -let's treat the ' mentally ill' with a pill-- this pill will provide the coping skills to adapt in the go go go N America hectic lifestyle . How is a pill going to do that? Of course , it can't. And it oftens makes a situation worse . To say nothing of its side effects. Gets extra insane when polypharmacy is used; multiple medications. Patients become zombies.
USA's NUMBER ONE medication by sales in 2014? Abilify
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/825053
'Aripiprazole, sold under the brand name Abilify among others, is an atypical antipsychotic. It is recommended and primarily used in the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.[SUP][5][/SUP] Other uses include as an add-on treatment in major depressive disorder, tic disorders, and irritability associated with autism.[SUP][6][/SUP] According to a Cochrane review, evidence for the oral form in schizophrenia is not sufficient to determine effects on general functioning.[SUP][7][/SUP] Additionally, because many people dropped out of the medication trials before they were completed, the overall strength of the conclusions is low.[SUP][7]'
[/SUP]
then there's 'depression'- it's overdiagnosis is a GROSS shame to N America. Projected leading cause of disability by 2025. They have sub-sections of depression such as Seasonal affective disorder (SAD). Psychiatry needs to label everything. If a Dept head of Psychiatry walked into The Rx, we'd all likely be on meds. 'hey, did you know you have symptoms of.....?.....'...:missingte . The FDA? have a look:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19339358
'The report is part of the National Institute of Mental Health-funded Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) project – the largest study of the treatment of depression conducted in the United States. It showed that findings from clinical studies used to gain FDA approval of antidepressants are not applicable to most patients with depression.
Researchers at the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health compared symptoms and outcomes in depressed patients who met phase III study inclusion criteria to those who did not. Phase III studies for antidepressants determine the effectiveness of the drug in comparison to a placebo.
The inclusion criteria for these studies aren’t standardized or subject to any federal guidelines. Typically this means that patients with milder forms of depression, chronic depression, or other psychiatric or medical conditions in addition to short-term depression are excluded from studies.
In other words, the majority of “real world” patients with depression who end up taking antidepressants are excluded from clinical studies. It should be obvious why this is a problem. In a normal, clinical setting many patients with depression do also have other illnesses, such as diabetes, chronic fatigue syndrome or irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). It’s not unusual for them to have anxiety and insomnia, as well. In fact, it wouldn’t be presumptuous to expect that a depressed person might be suffering from a number of conditions that are either contributing to or caused by their illness.
Yet the only people that “qualify” for the clinical trials which determine whether antidepressants get approved by the FDA are those with short-term depression, no history of depression, no other psychiatric conditions such as anxiety, and no physical illnesses like heart disease or diabetes. This is the only subgroup of the general population for which we have any data on the efficacy of antidepressants.
By the same token, this means is that we have almost no clinical data on how antidepressants work for the “real world” patients who are most likely to be taking them. Indeed, after assessing 2,855 patients treated with citalopram (Celexa), the study authors found that fewer than one in four, or 22.2%, of the patients met the usual criteria for inclusion in phase III clinical trials.'
(note- i'm not saying medications have no use in the management of mental illness. And, please i mean no disrespect to sufferers )
to be sure, they're plenty people IN the profession who see the ills, have the courage to speak out, most noteworthy Br Breggin. He has been speaking out for years
https://www.amazon.com/Brain-Disabl...TF8&qid=1216143402&ref_=sr_1_1&s=books&sr=8-1
http://www.breggin.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=232
https://www.amazon.ca/Conscience-Psychiatry-Reform-Peter-Breggin/dp/098245600X
'The Conscience of Psychiatry is a biographical tribute to Dr. Breggin’s professional career that draws on more than fifty years of media excerpts and more than seventy new contributions from professionals in the field. The result is not only the story of his principled, courageous confrontations with organized psychiatry, drug companies, and government agencies—it is also a probing critique of the psychopharmaceutical complex.
The story spans more than five decades starting in college (1954-1958) when Dr. Breggin was a Harvard undergraduate student leading an innovative mental hospital volunteer program that drew national media attention and professional praise. It takes us through his successful opposition to the return of lobotomy and psychosurgery in the 1970s, his equally successful opposition to racist psychiatric federal programs in the 1990s, and on to his continuing efforts to protect children and adults from electroshock treatment and the excesses of psychiatric diagnosis and drugs. We see Dr. Breggin triumph when under attack from organized medicine, the pharmaceutical industry, and leaders in the field of psychiatry whose power and veracity he has successfully challenged. It demonstrates how many of his once radical critiques of the pseudoscience of biological psychiatry have now become accepted facts and truths. Finally, it describes his approach to empathic, principled therapy. It’s an inspiring story of how one man stood alone for decades and led in the creation of a movement that has become a liberating force for millions of children and adults who might otherwise have suffered at the hands of involuntary treatment, lobotomy, electroshock, and psychiatric drugs. '
Dr Jackson
https://www.amazon.com/Rethinking-P...id=1216143472&ref_=pd_bbs_sr_1&s=books&sr=1-1
overview;
[FONT="]-- Are patients aware of the fact that pharmacological therapies stress the brain in ways which may prevent or postpone symptomatic and functional recovery ?[/FONT]
[FONT="] ====================================================[/FONT]
[FONT="]Rethinking Psychiatric Drugs: A Guide for Informed Consent is a critical appraisal of the medications which an estimated 20% of Americans consume on a regular (and sometimes involuntary) basis.[/FONT]
[FONT="] It is the philosophically, epidemiologically, and scientifically supported revelation of how and why psychiatry’s drug therapies have contributed to a standard of care which frequently does more to harm than to cure.[/FONT]
[FONT="] Extensively researched and documented, the book addresses:[/FONT]
[FONT="] -- the process by which psychiatric drugs reach the market
-- the history and philosophy of Evidence Based Medicine[/FONT]
[FONT="] -- the common flaws in research methodologies which negate the validity of the psychiatric RCT (Randomized Controlled Trial)[/FONT]
[FONT="] -- the problem of allostatic load (how drugs stress the body)[/FONT]
[FONT="] -- the history, long term effects, and utility of the drugs used to suppress symptoms of depression, psychosis, inattention and hyperactivity[/FONT]
[FONT="] -- the effectiveness of alternatives to medication[/FONT]
[FONT="] Rethinking Psychiatric Drugs: A Guide for Informed Consent exposes the current crisis in medical ethics and epistemology, and attempts to restore to psychiatry an authentically informed consent to care.[/FONT]
https://sports.yahoo.com/news/nfl-d...-arm-decal-to-honor-slain-cops-141319148.html
[h=1]NFL denies Cowboys' request to wear 'Arm in Arm' decal to honor slain cops[/h]
<cite class="byline vcard top-line">By Eric Edholm<abbr>3 hours ago</abbr></cite>
<!-- google_ad_section_start --><meta content="2016-08-11T14:13:19Z" itemprop="datePublished"><meta content="NFL denies Cowboys' request to wear 'Arm in Arm' decal to honor slain cops" itemprop="headline"><meta content="" itemprop="alternativeHeadline"><meta content="https://media.zenfs.com/en/homerun/feed_manager_auto_publish_494/a6607cedfaa8204a0981d612ad0d3868" itemprop="image"><meta content="The Dallas Cowboys, led by Jason Witten, paid a noble tribute at the start of training camp to the police officers who were killed in a July shooting in downtown Dallas. Players, coaches and executives came out for the start of training camp on July 30 with a show of solidarity, walking arm-in-arm with Dallas police chief David Brown, Dallas mayor Mike Rawlings and some family members of the officers who were killed." itemprop="description">The Dallas Cowboys, led by Jason Witten, paid a noble tribute at the start of training camp to the police officers who were killed in a July shooting in downtown Dallas. But their plans to honor the officers further has been shut down by the NFL.
Players, coaches and executives came out for the start of training camp on July 30 with a show of solidarity, walking arm-in-arm with Dallas police chief David Brown, Dallas mayor Mike Rawlings and some family members of the officers who were killed.
[Yahoo Fantasy Football is open for the 2016 season. Sign up now]
<figure><figure class="cover get-lbdata-from-dom go-to-slideshow-lightbox" data-orig-index="0"> View photo
.
</figure>
<figcaption>The Dallas Cowboys planned to honor slain police officers with this decal, but the NFL denied it (AP).</figcaption></figure>Witten came up with the idea for the tribute at the start of camp and wanted to continue the message by wearing an “Arm in Arm” decal on the side of the Cowboys’ helmets this season, both in the preseason and in the regular season.
That request was shut down by the league, via the Dallas Morning News. The uniform police trumped the regular police, in this case.
We’ve reached out to the league for comment.
“Everyone has to be uniform with the league and the other 31 teams,” Cowboys executive Jones said after practice Wednesday. “We respect their decision.”
We don’t. Yes, it’s true that the NFL needs rules and guidelines and restrictions with these uniforms and control their product so that every player isn’t altering them every time a guppy dies on a road trip. There’s a set of guidelines in place for a reason, and the intent is correct as it’s written. But with every rule, there’s a worthy exception.
The NFL respectfully disagrees. That’s why it shut down tributes by Cameron Heyward to honor his father, by DeAngelo Williams to support breast cancer, William Gay to raise domestic violence awareness and so on and so forth. Come to think of it, those three oft-cited examples are all from the Pittsburgh Steelers; there are 31 other teams worth of players who have had similar requests turned back.
And yet Devon Still was allowed to go without a fine for honoring his daughter with eyeblack. It makes no sense.
The sad part? This is not shocking. We’ve come to expect the league to deny nearly all of these efforts. In turn, players see this and stop even asking. Their powerful voices as messengers to the people are then muted. Sure, there are other ways to pay tribute than a sticker on a helmet. But it takes away one very noble attempt to do good.
In the past, the league has said it doesn’t have the time and manpower to review all of these requests and make exceptions. But Shutdown Corner’s Frank Schwab has a great suggestion: Have Roger Goodell give up 1% of his $40 million annual salary to hire a handful of former players whose job it is to review these requests and then present them to the league. That could help a few former players looking for work and also help charities and awareness for some good causes. But that would be too logical.
Even if this were to happen, not all tributes should be accepted. There should be strict guidelines and limitations to what can happen. We understand the need for this. But for a team wanting to pay tribute to some fallen public servants and their families — something the NFL has said for years is important to the league — with maybe 30 seconds of air time on the broadcasts during games and be denied for it? It comes off as tone deaf, overly rigid and, to turn one of Goodell’s most embraced phases on its head, generally unaware.
[h=1]NFL denies Cowboys' request to wear 'Arm in Arm' decal to honor slain cops[/h]
<cite class="byline vcard top-line">By Eric Edholm<abbr>3 hours ago</abbr></cite><!-- google_ad_section_start --><meta content="2016-08-11T14:13:19Z" itemprop="datePublished"><meta content="NFL denies Cowboys' request to wear 'Arm in Arm' decal to honor slain cops" itemprop="headline"><meta content="" itemprop="alternativeHeadline"><meta content="https://media.zenfs.com/en/homerun/feed_manager_auto_publish_494/a6607cedfaa8204a0981d612ad0d3868" itemprop="image"><meta content="The Dallas Cowboys, led by Jason Witten, paid a noble tribute at the start of training camp to the police officers who were killed in a July shooting in downtown Dallas. Players, coaches and executives came out for the start of training camp on July 30 with a show of solidarity, walking arm-in-arm with Dallas police chief David Brown, Dallas mayor Mike Rawlings and some family members of the officers who were killed." itemprop="description">The Dallas Cowboys, led by Jason Witten, paid a noble tribute at the start of training camp to the police officers who were killed in a July shooting in downtown Dallas. But their plans to honor the officers further has been shut down by the NFL.
Players, coaches and executives came out for the start of training camp on July 30 with a show of solidarity, walking arm-in-arm with Dallas police chief David Brown, Dallas mayor Mike Rawlings and some family members of the officers who were killed.
[Yahoo Fantasy Football is open for the 2016 season. Sign up now]
<figure><figure class="cover get-lbdata-from-dom go-to-slideshow-lightbox" data-orig-index="0"> View photo
.
<figcaption>The Dallas Cowboys planned to honor slain police officers with this decal, but the NFL denied it (AP).</figcaption></figure>Witten came up with the idea for the tribute at the start of camp and wanted to continue the message by wearing an “Arm in Arm” decal on the side of the Cowboys’ helmets this season, both in the preseason and in the regular season.
That request was shut down by the league, via the Dallas Morning News. The uniform police trumped the regular police, in this case.
We’ve reached out to the league for comment.
“Everyone has to be uniform with the league and the other 31 teams,” Cowboys executive Jones said after practice Wednesday. “We respect their decision.”
We don’t. Yes, it’s true that the NFL needs rules and guidelines and restrictions with these uniforms and control their product so that every player isn’t altering them every time a guppy dies on a road trip. There’s a set of guidelines in place for a reason, and the intent is correct as it’s written. But with every rule, there’s a worthy exception.
The NFL respectfully disagrees. That’s why it shut down tributes by Cameron Heyward to honor his father, by DeAngelo Williams to support breast cancer, William Gay to raise domestic violence awareness and so on and so forth. Come to think of it, those three oft-cited examples are all from the Pittsburgh Steelers; there are 31 other teams worth of players who have had similar requests turned back.
And yet Devon Still was allowed to go without a fine for honoring his daughter with eyeblack. It makes no sense.
The sad part? This is not shocking. We’ve come to expect the league to deny nearly all of these efforts. In turn, players see this and stop even asking. Their powerful voices as messengers to the people are then muted. Sure, there are other ways to pay tribute than a sticker on a helmet. But it takes away one very noble attempt to do good.
In the past, the league has said it doesn’t have the time and manpower to review all of these requests and make exceptions. But Shutdown Corner’s Frank Schwab has a great suggestion: Have Roger Goodell give up 1% of his $40 million annual salary to hire a handful of former players whose job it is to review these requests and then present them to the league. That could help a few former players looking for work and also help charities and awareness for some good causes. But that would be too logical.
Even if this were to happen, not all tributes should be accepted. There should be strict guidelines and limitations to what can happen. We understand the need for this. But for a team wanting to pay tribute to some fallen public servants and their families — something the NFL has said for years is important to the league — with maybe 30 seconds of air time on the broadcasts during games and be denied for it? It comes off as tone deaf, overly rigid and, to turn one of Goodell’s most embraced phases on its head, generally unaware.
– – – – – – –
Eric Edholm is a writer for Shutdown Corner on Yahoo Sports.
