In <Pine.SUN.3.91.960520194233.3271Q-100000 at garcia.efn.org> Support
Coalition - David Oaks <dendron at efn.org> writes:
>>>On Mon, 20 May 1996, Rogue 007 wrote:
>> Support Coalition - David Oaks <dendron at efn.org> wrote:
>>>> >1. Forcing neuroleptic drugs is common, both inside institutions
>> >and on an outpatient basis, in the USA and internationally.
>>>> 1a. This is because the mainstream media propagates the Big Lie that
>> there is something ``evil'' about using antipsychotic meds for mental
>> illness treatment. As a result, many uniformed non- mental patients
>> have a negative attitude toward antipsychotic meds. Is it any wonder
>> many untreated sufferers exposed to the same influences don't desire
>> meds while dazed, confused, and paranoid?
>>THE ABOVE IS TOTAL MISINFORMATION: Mainstream medical literature itself
>labels neuroleptics "dysphorogenic," that is, people don't generally like
>to take it. That's why one doesn't see many people in alleys and behind
>schools saying, "Hey, HEY, pssst, wanna buy some Haldol?" It happens very
>occasionally... and usually not twice with the same customer! Meanwhile,
>for the last forty years, the mainstream media has TRUMPETED neuroleptics
>as one of the main alleged proofs of "miracle medicine," and commonly
>(mistakenly) attributes 1950's deinstitutionalization to the pills. Let
>Rogue 007 post ONE example of mainstream media blasting neuroleptics... we
>monitor the media internationally, and have only seen very rare
>exceptions, for the past two decades.
>>Perhaps "Rogue 007" has some kind of underlying motivation, by
>stretching so extremely far to explain why neuroleptics are
>unpopular. SO I'M GOING TO NAIL THIS REBUTTAL DOWN:
>>In the medical literature there are a few examples of psychiatrists taking
>the pill to see what's like. The very first said she felt like she was
>"dying." Wrote Dr. C. Quarti on Nov. 9, 1951, about what it was like just
>one hour after her trying chlorpromazine: "I began to have the impression
>that I was becoming weaker... that I was dying. It was very painful and
>agonizing." [CITATION: JP Swazey, "Chlorpromazine in Psychiatry,"
>(Cambridge, MA; MIT Press, pp. 117-120, 201-207.)]
>>Two psychiatrists tried Haldol and wrote up their experiences, saying they
>had to quit work for the day, and couldn't even answer the phone unless
>ordered to. These two psychiatrists injected themselves with 5 mg of
>Haldol, and wrote up their experiences: "... a marked slowing of thinking
>and movement developed, along with profound inner restlessness...
>neither subject could continue work, and each left for over 36 hours...
>Each subject complained of paralysis of volition, a lack of physical
>and psychic energy. The subjects felt unable to read, telephone or
>perform household tasks of their own will, but could perform these
>tasks if demanded to do so. There was no sleepiness or sedation; on the
>contrary, both subjects complained of severe anxiety."
>[CITATION: R.H. Belmaker and D. Wald, "British Journal of Psychiatry,
>131:222-223, p. 1977.]
>>And what about what T. Van Putten, et al. said in the "Archives of
>General Psychiatry" (35:480, 1978): "The reluctance to take
>anti-psychotic medication was significantly associated with
>extrapyramidal symptoms [trembling, drooling, rigidity, etc.],
>most notably a subtle akathesia [restlessness]."
>>The true experts on neuroleptics are those who have had it. They
>understand what mainstream literature shows, if you dig deep enough: It's
>not really a tranquilizer. The internal experience tends to be one of
>antsiness; it's just that thinking while on the drug is very hard, and if
>one tries it becomes even harder. One becomes more easily manageable.
>>SO EVERYONE, WATCH OUT FOR POSTS BY "ROGUE 007." Anyone who would go out
>of his way to claim that neuroleptics are not unpleasant for non-compliant
>folks -- even though the poster claims some familiarity with the field --
>is displaying a severe kind of distress: "lack-of-empathyitis," and
>"big-lie-itis." A most terrible combination. REFUTATION, ROGUE 007? Come on,
>let's see what you got.
>>> >2. Long-term administration of these drugs (Prolixin, Haldol, etc.)
>> >can cause deleterious brain changes which can be seen from
>> >post-mortem and animal studies, by neuroscientists.
>>>> 2a. Untreated schizophrenia sufferers can live in a nightmare world
>> where all thoughts, emotions, and sensory input is heightened and
>> magnified to such an overwhelming intensity their experience is like a
>> living Hell. That is the alternative to not receiving medical care
>> from the point of view of a mental illness sufferer.
>>Hmmmm... 1a. and 2a. don't seem to add up very well, do they? I mean,
>Lithium tends to have fans, who prefer to take it, because they don't
>like the effects. But neuroleptics frequently need to be forced or
>coerced upon people. So if the alternative to neuroleptics are so
>terrifying, why don't people flock to neuroleptics? Because, despite
>what Rogue 007 says, THEY OFTEN DON'T LIKE TO TAKE THEM.
>>> >3. Neuroscientists have generally been silent about bringing
>> >this news to the public, and explaining "there may be a problem."
>> >Certainly, no informed consent tells patient or family about these
>> >brain changes, except tardive dyskinesia.
>>>> 3a. Which neuroscientists are you referring to? At what facilities?
>> And if they have _generally_ been silent, obvious not _all_ of them
>> have been silent. Perhaps Thomas Szasz and Peter Breggin are at the
>> forefront of those who have been unable to keep quiet.
>>I am referring to an ABSENCE of neuroscientists, as in a VACUUM of
>neuroscientists, as in HARDLY ANY NEUROSCIENTISTS are ever speaking out.
>So that would be just about all of them. For instance, Jill Taylor at
>McLean's KNOWS about random dendritic spreading, but won't cough and let
>the public know it's there.
>>> >4. During "Brain Awareness Week," as I explained on NPR's
>> >"Talk of the Nation," our organization held a protest of the
>> >above silence.
>>>> 4a. You received national public radio coverage? This is an example
>> of not speaking out?
>>Yes, only IF we organize, and speak out together, in numbers... which
>the "Brain Boycott" did. So you support our Brain Boycott now?
>>> >5. To publicize this, we held a tongue-in-cheek (but effective)
>> >"BRAIN BOYCOTT," encouraging people to contact McLean's
>> >"brain bank" (1-800-BRAIN-BANK). Researcher Jill Taylor there
>> >has seen dendritic spreading attributed to a rebound against
>> >neuroleptic drugging, but refuses to call this brain "change"
>> >a potential problem. (There are *many* forms of brain change
>> >following long term use of neuroleptics, as one can well
>> >imagine!) You can call Jill yourself and ask her.
>>>> 5a. And I assume you have posted Dr. Taylor's phone number to the Net
>> with her permission, correct?
>>I did not publish her phone number. I published the BRAIN BANK's phone
>number, and you can reach her through that. Dr. Taylor has said she feels
>that the Brain Boycott has generally been good for business, and she said
>she welcomed the attention. Thank you for your sudden concern about human
>rights of Dr. Taylor... now how do you feel about people at McLean being
>FORCIBLY injected with neuroleptics? Perhaps your human rights concern is
>a bit.... selective?
>>> >6. People reading the above five points might deny them,
>> >but now can never say, "But I was never told, I didn't know."
>>>> 6a. People reading your similar spams all over Usenet never received
>> an answer to the most important question I posed to you: in what way
>> are these changes worse than living through a decades-long hell of
>> untreated mental illness symptoms?
>>You missed the point. It's not just which is worse, IT'S *WHO* DECIDES.
>If someone decides to take neuroleptics, fully informed, and offered
>alternatives... FINE. No problem. Many of our members choose that.
>But if not, then "NO" means "NO." And there are very rational reasons for
>that "NO." Bizarre "pharmaceutical fundamentalists" want to make
>the decision FOR us. We may be mental patients, but we're American
>mental patients, DON'T TRED ON US.
>>You claim somehow that *YOU* are more capable than us to decide
>what we should take; yet as anyone can see from the above you haven't
>even bothered to do the most basic of homework on neuroleptics.
>Unfortunately, this is very typical in the field. And they want
>to make decisions for us?
Right on, bro. Tell it like it is.
--
John Hammell, Political Coordinator, The Life Extension Foundation
800-333-2553, 305-929-2905, 305-929-0507 FAX
jhammell at ix.netcom.comhttp://www.lef.org/lef/index.html
**For Complimentary Copy Life Extension Magazine-Send Street Address**
******International Health Alliance (I.H.A) Now Forming to Oppose*****
The Codex Alimentarius Commission re Restrictions on Dietary Supplements
European Assistance Especially Needed- email phone/fax/street address