Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
General Discussion / Massive Fraud: Psychiatry’s Corrupt Industry
« Last post by Patricia on Today at 03:45:13 AM »

Massive Fraud: Psychiatry’s Corrupt Industry

   For decades, psychiatrists and psychologists have claimed a monopoly over the field of mental health. Governments and private health insurance companies have provided them with billions of dollars every year to treat “mental illness,” only to face industry demands for even more funds to improve the supposed, ever-worsening state of mental health. No other industry can afford to fail consistently and expect to get more funding.

A significant portion of these appropriations and insurance reimbursements has been lost due to financial fraud within the mental health industry, an international problem estimated to cost more than a hundred billion dollars every year.
  • The United States loses approximately $100 billion (€81.5 billion) to health care fraud each year. Up to $20 billion (€15.7 billion) of this is due to fraudulent practices in the mental health industry.
  • One of the largest health care fraud suits in US history was in mental health, yet it is the smallest sector within health care.
  • A study of US Medicaid and Medicare insurance fraud, especially in New York, over a twenty-year period, showed psychiatry to have the worst track record of all medical disciplines.
  • Germany reports roughly $1 billion (€807 million) is defrauded each year.
  • In Australia, health care fraud and patient over-servicing has cost taxpayers up to $330 million (€226 million) a year.
  • In Ontario, Canada, psychotherapist Michael Bogart was sentenced to 18 months in jail for defrauding the government of almost $1 million (€815,993), the largest medical fraud case in the history of the province.
Mark Schiller, president of the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons, admitted: “I have frequently seen psychiatrists diagnose patients with a range of psychiatric diagnoses that aren’t justified, to obtain [insurance] reimbursements.”

However, psychiatrist and psychologist membership bodies do not police this criminality. Rather, as former president of the American Psychiatric Association (APA), Paul Fink, arrogantly admitted: “It is the task of the APA to protect the earning power of psychiatrists.”

The mental health monopoly has practically zero accountability and zero liability for its failures. This has allowed psychiatrists and psychologists to commit far more than just financial fraud. The roster of crimes committed by these “professionals” ranges from fraud, drug offenses, rape and sexual abuse to child molestation, assault, manslaughter and murder.

The primary purpose of mental health treatment must be the therapeutic care and treatment of individuals who are suffering emotional disturbance. It must never be the financial or personal gain of the practitioner. Those suffering are inevitably vulnerable and impressionable. Proper treatment therefore demands the highest level of trustworthiness and integrity in the practitioner.

As experience has shown that there are many criminal mental health practitioners, the Citizens Commission on Human Rights has developed a database at that lists many of the people in the mental health industry who have been convicted and jailed.
Created in response to the high number of convicted mental health practitioners who continue to seek employment in the mental health industry, one of its primary purposes is to inform people about the background of those individuals.

There is no place for criminal intent or deed in the field of mental health. CCHR works with others to ensure this standard is upheld.

This information is presented as a public service to law enforcement agencies, health care fraud investigators, international police agencies, medical and psychological licensing boards and the general public with the purpose of bringing to an end criminal psychiatric abuse in the mental health system.


Jan Eastgate
Citizens Commission
on  Human Rights International

 Psychiatric Malpractice: The Subversion of Medicine Introduction

   Alan I. Leshner, psychiatrist and former head of the National Institute of Drug Abuse once stated: “My belief is that [the physician] should be put in jail if you refuse to prescribe S.S.R.I.s [the new types of antidepressants] for depression. I also believe that five years from now, you should be put in jail if you don’t give crack addicts the medications we’re working on now.”

In the many years of working on mental health reform, I have spoken to hundreds of physicians and thousands of patients, while helping to expose numerous psychiatric violations of human rights. However, until recently, the thought had never occurred to me that physicians’ rights might also be under assault. Why should a physician be jailed for refusing to prescribe an antidepressant for depression?

Many primary care physicians have acknowledged there are numerous physical conditions that can cause emotional and behavioral problems, and the vital need to check for them first. It follows then that relying on an antidepressant to suppress emotional symptoms, without first looking for and correcting a possible underlying physical illness, could simply be giving patients a chemical fix, while leaving them with an illness that could worsen.

What if a primary care physician or family practitioner correctly diagnosed and cured such a physical illness and the depression ended without psychoactive drugs? Could that physician then be accused of being unethical, or even be charged and jailed for the “criminal medical negligence” of not prescribing an antidepressant?

Crazy, you say? Couldn’t happen? Well, perhaps. But it seems the day has come when a good physician can be accused of being unethical for practicing ethical medicine. Today, a physician, specialist or otherwise, can be criticized, bullied and treated like a “fringe” dweller for practicing workable, diagnostic medicine.

This information has been gathered with physicians in mind, particularly those who would just like to practice nonpsychiatric medicine, who are driven by a high and caring purpose in the best Hippocratic tradition, and who want to be left to get on with the job of caring for people’s health to the best of their ability. It is for physicians who are concerned about the fact that millions of children are taking prescribed addictive, speed-like stimulants for a supposed mental disorder, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).

There is a pervasive mental health thinking that appears in primary care medicine today. It is largely due to the “success” of psychiatry’s diagnostic system, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV). This system and the mental diseases section of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) have been heavily promoted as vitally necessary, mental disorder standards for nonpsychiatric physicians.

But there is something else here. Psychiatry’s diagnostic system did not arrive in a spirit of professional respect for the traditions and knowledge of primary care medicine and other medical specialties. There was no letter of introduction saying, “We respect the sanctity and seniority of your relationship with your patients, and your wish to provide the best for them. Here is our diagnostic system, please look it over and first satisfy yourself from your own experience that we are on the right track. This is valid science. We would appreciate your feedback and constructive criticism. By all means holler for help if you need us. Yours in the quest for better health.”

Instead, it arrived in effect saying, “Here is a young child with severe mental problems. Our expert diagnosis is already made, in which case you have to do no more than follow our strict drug prescription instructions and be subject to our expert supervision.” Or put otherwise, it
says, “Your patients seem to trust you more than us, so here is how you have to diagnose their mental illness, from which they undoubtedly suffer.”

This is the coercive undercurrent that has indelibly characterized psychiatry since it first assumed custodial duties within asylums 200 years ago. It is manifest in many different ways, and wherever it meddles, it is extremely destructive of certainty, pride, honor, industry, initiative, integrity, peace of mind, well-being and sanity. These are qualities that we must fight to preserve for all patients. And for all physicians.


Jan Eastgate
Citizens Commission
on Human  Rights International

Psychiatric Rape: Assaulting Women and Children Introduction

   There could be few more bitter experiences than the desperate victim who accepts help and is then betrayed by the “benefactor.”

Imagine a 7-year-old girl who has been referred to a psychiatrist or psychologist for help with emotional problems related to incest. Suppose that the specialist then also sexually abuses the girl during “therapy.” What must be the emotional upheaval suffered by this tragic victim?
Such despicable treachery in the wake of an already serious personal crisis could only burden the victim with further emotional scars and instability.

It is also a damning criticism of those “professionals” entrusted with the task of helping people who are extremely fragile emotionally.

On October 31, 2002, French psychotherapist Jean-Pierre Tremel was sentenced to 10 years in prison for raping and sexually abusing two young patients that the court recognized as being extremely vulnerable. Tremel, age 52, claimed his “treatment” was based on an “Oriental tradition” wherein “old men introduce girls to sexual practices.”

Such “treatment” is never help. It is a disgusting betrayal in the guise of help, an all-too-frequent occurrence in the mental health industry:
  • A woman is statistically at greater risk of being raped while on a psychiatrist’s couch than while jogging alone at night through a city park.
  • In a British study of therapist-patient sexual contact among psychologists, 25 percent reported having treated a patient who had been sexually involved with another therapist.
  • A 2001 study reported that one out of twenty clients who had been sexually abused by their therapist was a minor, the average age being 7 for girls and 12 for boys. The youngest child was three.
While compassion, common sense and decency declare that sexual abuse of patients is a serious and criminal act, psychiatrists and psychologists work hard to sanitize it—even when the victims of the exploitation are children. Combining the invented diagnoses in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) with subtle but perverse arguments, or even outright lies, they labor to decriminalize the sexual abuse of women and child patients.

Meanwhile, mental health licensing bodies rarely mete out more than the wrist-slap—temporary license revocation—a charge of “professional misconduct” and temporarily suspend a practitioner’s license to practice.
  • In 2003, the Colorado State Board of Psychologist Examiners revoked the license of Dr. John Dicke, whose treatment of a 5-year-old boy included using sex toys. According to the boy’s father, his son had been “stripped naked, tortured, restrained, verbally abused, sexually abused, brainwashed and horrified by a dildo” during the alleged therapy.
  • In 1989, Dr. Paul A. Walters, psychiatrist in charge of student health at Stanford University, California, and former head of Harvard University’s Health Services’ Mental Health Division, was forced to resign after allegations of his having “frequent sex” with a female patient. The woman, who had been the victim of sexual abuse as a child, was awarded more than $200,000 in an out-of-court settlement. She said Walters had used her to perform oral sex on him, “sometimes as often as two out of three psychiatric analysis sessions per week.”
Some psychiatrists, however, are criminally charged and convicted.
  • An Orange County, California, psychiatrist, James Harrington White, was convicted of the forced sodomy of a male patient. After an investigation by Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR), White was found to have drugged young men, then videotaped himself having sex with them. White was sentenced to prison for almost seven years.
No medical doctor, social organization or family member should hand over any person to face the mental health “treatments” that pass as therapy today.

This is one of a series of reports produced by CCHR that deal with mental health betrayal. It is issued as a public service and warning.

Therapist sexual abuse is sexual abuse. Therapist rape is rape. They will never constitute therapy. Until this is widely recognized however, and prosecutors and judges treat every incidence of this as such, psychiatrists, psychologists and psychotherapists will remain a threat to any woman or child undergoing mental health therapy.


Jan Eastgate
Citizens Commission
on   Human Rights International
Rehab Fraud: Psychiatry’s Drug Scam


   What hope is there?

Wouldn’t a universal, proven cure for drug addiction be a good thing? And is it possible?
First, let’s clearly define what is meant by “cure.” For the individual a cure means complete and permanent absence of any overwhelming physical or mental desire, need or compulsion to take drugs. For the society it means the rehabilitation of the addict as a consistently honest, ethical, productive and successful member. In the 1970s, this first question would have seemed rather strange, if not absurd.

“Of course that would be a good thing!” and “Are you kidding?” would have been
common responses.

Today, however, the responses are considerably different. A drug addict might answer, “Look, don’t talk to me about cures. I’ve tried every program there is and failed. None of them work.” Or, “You can’t cure heredity; my father was an alcoholic.” A layperson might say, “They’ve already cured it; methadone, isn’t it?” Or, “They’ve found it’s an incurable brain disease; you know, like diabetes, it can’t be cured.” Or even, “Science found it can’t be helped; it’s something to do with a chemical imbalance in the brain.”

Very noticeable would be the absence of the word, even the idea, of cure, whether amongst addicts, families of addicts, government officials, media or anywhere else.

In its place are words like disease, illness, chronic, management, maintenance, reduction and relapse. Addicts in rehab are taught to refer to themselves as “recovering,” never “cured.” Stated in different ways, the implicit consensus that has been created is that drug addiction is incurable and something an addict will have to learn to live with—or die with.

Is all hope lost?

Before considering that question, it is very important to understand one thing about drug rehabilitation today. Our hope of a cure for drug addiction was not lost; it was buried by an avalanche of false information and false solutions.

First of all, consider psychiatrists’ long-term propagation of dangerous drugs as “harmless”:
  • In the 1960s, psychiatrists made LSD not only acceptable, but an “adventure” to tens of ­thousands of college students, promoting the false concept of improving life through “recreational,” mind-altering drugs.
  • In 1967, US psychiatrists met to discuss the role of drugs in the year 2000. Influential New York psychiatrist Nathan Kline, who served on ­committees for the US National Institute of Mental Health and the World Health Organization stated, “In principle, I don’t see that drugs are any more abnormal than reading, music, art, yoga, or twenty other things—if you take a broad point of view.”
  • In 1973, University of California psychiatrist, Louis J. West, wrote, “Indeed a debate may soon be raging among some clinical scientists on the question of whether clinging to the drug-free state of mind is not an antiquated position for anyone—physician or patient—to hold.”
  • In the 1980s, Californian psychiatric drug ­specialist, Ronald K. Siegel, made the outrageous assertion that being drugged is a basic human “need,” a “fourth drive” of the same nature as sex, hunger and thirst.
  • In 1980, a study in the Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry claimed that, “taken no more than two or three times per week, cocaine creates no serious problems.”
  • According to the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration’s office in Connecticut, the false belief that cocaine was not addictive contributed to the dramatic rise in its use in the 1980s.
  • In 2003, Charles Grob, director of child and adolescent psychiatry at the University of California Harbor Medical Center believed that Ecstasy ­(hallucinogenic street drug) was potentially “good medicine” for treating alcoholism and drug abuse.
Today, drug regulatory agencies all over the world approve clinical trials for the use of hallucinogenic drugs to handle anything from anxiety to alcoholism, despite the drugs being known to cause psychosis.

The failure of the war against drugs is largely due to the failure to stop one of the most dangerous drug pushers of all time: the psychiatrist. The sad irony is that he has also established himself in positions enabling him to control the drug rehab field, even though he can show no results for the billions awarded by governments and legislatures. Governments, groups, families, and individuals that continue to accept his false information and drug rehabilitation techniques, do so at their own peril. The odds overwhelmingly predict that they will fail in every respect.

Drug addiction is not a disease. Real solutions do exist.

Clearing away psychiatry’s false information about drugs and addiction is not only a fundamental part of restoring hope, it is the first step towards achieving real drug rehabilitation.


Jan Eastgate
Citizens Commission
on   Human Rights International

Schizophrenia – Psychiatry’s For Profit “Disease” Introduction

   Life can sometimes be a real challenge. It can get very rough indeed. A family faced with a seriously disturbed and irrational member can become desperate in their attempts to resolve the crisis.

To whom can they turn when this happens?

According to psychiatrists, one should consult them as the mental health experts. But that is a deception, as many have discovered.

Dr. Megan Shields, a practicing family physician for more than twenty-five years, and an Advisory Board member of the Citizens Commission on Human  Rights, warns: “Psychiatrists know nothing about the mind, treat the  individual as no more than an organ in the head (the brain) and have  about as much interest in spirituality, standard medicine and curing, as  an executioner has in saving lives.”

In the film, A Beautiful Mind, Nobel Prize winner John Nash is  depicted as relying on psychiatry’s latest breakthrough drugs to prevent  a relapse of his “schizophrenia.” This is Hollywood fiction, however,  as Nash himself disputes the film’s portrayal of him taking “newer  medications.” At the time of his Nobel Prize award, Nash had not taken  any psychiatric drugs for twenty-four years and had recovered naturally from his  disturbed state.

This is not to suggest that anyone taking prescribed,  psychotropic drugs should immediately dispense with them. Due to their  dangerous side effects, no one should stop taking any psychiatric drug  without the advice and assistance of a competent nonpsychiatric,  medical doctor.

We wish to highlight, however, that there are solutions to serious mental disturbances that avoid the serious risks and flaws inherent in psychiatry.

Any psychiatrist or psychologist who claims that “serious mental illnesses” are no different than a heart condition, gangrene of the leg or the common cold, is dealing in deception.
As Dr. Thomas Szasz, professor of psychiatry emeritus at the  State University of New York, Syracuse, states, “If we are to consider  mental disease to be like physical disease, we ought to have biochemical  or pathological evidence.” And if an “illness” is to be “scientifically meaningful, it must somehow be capable of being approached, measured or tested in a scientific fashion, as through a blood test or an electroencephalograph [recording of brain electrical activity]. If it cannot be so measured—as is the case [with]…‘mental illness’—then the phrase ‘illness’ is at best a metaphor and at worst a myth, and that therefore ‘treating’ these ‘illnesses’ is an equally…unscientific enterprise.”

In practice, there is abundant evidence that real physical  illness, with real pathology, can seriously affect an individual’s  mental state and behavior. Psychiatry completely ignores this weight of  scientific evidence, preferring to assign all blame to illnesses and  supposed “chemical imbalances” in the brain that have never been proven  to exist, and limits all practice to brutal treatments that have done nothing but permanently damage the brain and the individual.

Knowing nothing about the mind, the brain, or about the  underlying causes of serious mental disturbance, psychiatry still sears  the brain with electroshock, tears it with psychosurgery and deadens it  with dangerous drugs. Completely ignorant of what they are dealing with, they simply prefer the expedient approach of “throwing a hand grenade into a switchboard to fix it.” It sounds and looks impressive, but in the process destroys a whole lot that’s good, cures nothing but costs billions of taxpayers’ dollars each year.

By destroying parts of the brain, the person is more tractable,  but less alive. The original mental disturbance remains in place, just suppressed. This is psychiatry in action in the treatment of disturbed individuals.

The information in this report is a warning for anyone who may be experiencing serious difficulties in life, or knows of someone who is, and who is looking for answers.

There are alternatives to psychiatric treatment. Seek out and support them for they can repair and build. They also work. Avoid psychiatry because it only tears apart and destroys. And it never works.


Jan Eastgate
Citizens Commission
on   Human Rights International

The Real Crisis  in Mental Health Today Introduction

   How concerned should we be about reports that mental illness has become an epidemic striking one out of every four people in the world today? According to the source of these alarming reports—the psychiatric industry—mental illness threatens to engulf us all and can only be checked by immediate and massive increases in funding. They warn of the disastrous effects of withheld appropriations. What the psychiatrists never warn of is that the very diagnostic system used to derive the alarming statistic—their own Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV (DSM-IV) and its equivalent, the mental disorders section of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10)—are under attack for their lack of scientific authority and veracity and their almost singular emphasis on psychotropic drug treatment.

Professor Herb Kutchins from California State University, Sacramento, and Professor Stuart A. Kirk from the University of New York, authors of several books describing the flaws of the DSM, warn, “There are indeed many illusions about DSM and very strong needs among its developers to believe that their dreams of scientific excellence and utility have come true....”
The “bitter medicine” is that DSM has “unsuccessfully attempted to medicalize too many human troubles.”

Professor Edward Shorter, author of A History of Psychiatry, stated, “Rather than heading off into the brave new world of science, DSM-IV-style psychiatry seemed in some ways to be heading out into the desert.”

We formulated this report and its recommendations for those with responsibility in deciding the funding and fate of mental health programs and insurance coverage, including legislators and other decision-makers charged with the task of protecting the health, well-being and safety of their citizens.

The results of the widespread reliance by psychiatrists on the DSM, with its ever-expanding list of illnesses for each of which a psychiatric drug can be legally prescribed, include these staggering statistics:
  • Twenty million schoolchildren worldwide have now been diagnosed with mental disorders and prescribed cocaine-like stimulants and powerful antidepressants as treatment.
  • Psychiatric drug use and abuse is surging worldwide: More than 100 million prescriptions for antidepressants alone were written in 2002 at a cost of $19.5 billion (€15.9 billion).
  • One in seven prescriptions in France includes a psychotropic drug and more than 50 percent of the unemployed—1.8 million—take psychotropic drugs.
  • Meanwhile, driven by DSM-derived mental illness statistics, the international mental health budget has skyrocketed in the last ten years.
  • In the United States, the mental health budget soared from $33 billion (€29.7 billion) in 1994 to more than $80 billion (€72 billion) today.
  • Switzerland’s spending on mental health increased from $73.5 million (€65 million) in 1988 to over $184.8 million (€165 million) over a ten-year period.
  • Germany currently spends more than $2.6 billion (€2.34 billion) a year on “mental health.”
  • In France, mental health costs have soared, contributing $400 million (€361 million) to the country’s deficit.
In spite of record spending, countries now face escalating levels of child abuse, suicide, drug abuse, violence and crime—very real problems for which the psychiatric industry can identify neither causes nor solutions. It is safe to conclude, therefore, that a reduction in the funding of psychiatric programs will not cause a worsening of mental health. Less funding for harmful psychiatric practices will, in fact, improve the state of mental health.
The evidence presented herein has been drawn from physicians, attorneys, judges, psychiatrists, parents and others active in the mental health or related fields. The consensus of these experts is that DSM-based, psychiatric initiatives such as the broadening of involuntary commitment laws and the expansion of so-called community mental health plans are detrimental to society in human and economic terms. The same applies to programs such as the screening for mental disorders of young children in schools.

The claim that only increased funding will cure the problems of psychiatry has lost its ring of truth. Fields of expertise that are built on scientific claims are routinely called upon to deliver empirical proof to support their theories. When the Centers for Disease Control receives funds to combat a dangerous disease, the funding results in the discovery of a biological cause and development of a cure. Biological tests exist to determine the presence or absence of most bodily diseases. While people can have serious mental difficulties, psychiatry has no objective, physical test to confirm the presence of any mental illness. Diagnosis is purely subjective.

The many critical challenges facing societies today reflect the vital need to strengthen individuals through workable, viable and humanitarian alternatives to harmful psychiatric options. We invite you to review for yourself the alternatives we have included. We respectfully offer the information in this report for your consideration so that you may draw your own conclusions about the state of mental health and psychiatry’s ability, or lack thereof, to contribute to its resolution.

Rohit Adi, M.D.
Mary Jo Pagel, M.D.
Julian Whitaker, M.D.
Anthony P. Urbanek, M.D



 Checkups: Can gentle brain stimulation ease the pain of fibromyalgia symptoms?   

Mark Bowen WCPO Contributor ,  Gretchen MacKnight WCPO Contributor  11:24 AM, Oct 30, 2014 11:29 AM, Oct 30, 2014 

  CINCINNATI - Are you exhausted, no matter how much sleep you get? Do you wake up with deep body aches, as if you have the flu? What about your memory? Feeling a little foggy these days?

These complaints are typical for people who suffer with the chronic pain and fatigue of fibromyalgia.

Medication helps some, but not all, and doctors are constantly looking for alternatives.
Now, researchers at the University of Cincinnati are testing a new treatment to determine whether gentle, brain stimulation will reduce the severity of pain in patients with fibromyalgia.
They use a special electrode called, NeuroPoint. It is manufactured by a company called Cerephex Corporation. The therapy is known as RINCE, “Reduced Impedance Noninvasive Cortical Electrostimulation. “

“We apply an electrode to a specific area of the brain and apply a very gentle, electrical stimulation. So it’s applied right on the surface of the skull,“ said Lesley Arnold, MD.  "It’s non-invasive. And it’s pain-free.”

WATCH: Dr. Arnold explains how NeuroPoint works in the video player above
Arnold is a professor in the UC Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience, and she is a principal investigator of the research trials. University of Cincinnati is one of 16 centers across the nation participating in the brain stimulation study.

“The idea is that this stimulation will correct the abnormalities that are thought to lead to chronic pain in patients with fibromyalgia,” Arnold said.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, fibromyalgia occurs in two percent of the general population  in the United States. It’s more common in women, although men and children can suffer from it too.

     Fibromyalgia symptoms may include:
  •           Pain all over the body
  •           Sleep difficulties
  •           Morning stiffness
  •           Muscle knots
  •           Cramping
  •           Headaches
  •           Memory & focus problems (sometimes called brain fog)
  •           Painful menstrual periods
  “Because it’s associated with chronic pain and fatigue, it can disrupt a person’s ability to function on a day-to-day basis,” Arnold said.

In fact, the CDC estimates that working adults with fibromyalgia miss almost 17 days of work each year, compared with six days for people who do not have fibromyalgia.

Arnold said that no one knows the exact cause of fibromyalgia, but it may be related to overactive brain activity that causes some people to feel pain at higher levels than others.
“We think that fibromyalgia is the result of hyperactive nerves that are involved in pain processing,” she said. “Treatments are aimed at trying to normalize the pain-processing centers in the brain.”

   Arnold and her colleagues are now enrolling patients to test the brain stimulation therapy. Men and women with fibromyalgia between the age of 22 and 65 may be eligible to participate. For more information, please contact Kerri Earles at 513-558-7104.

 “The idea is that this stimulation will correct the abnormalities that are thought to lead to chronic pain in patients with fibromyalgia,” says Arnold.

Patients receive 2 treatments a week for 12 weeks. The actual treatment takes about 11 minutes.

“Patients do not experience any sensation from the stimulation,” Arnold said.

     Resources Connect with WCPO contributors @markbowenmedia & @gmacknight1 on Twitter!
Great news!!  I've pre-ordered two copies--one for my use and one to share with my peeps!!
Awesome!!!  I cant wait to get my book!!! :)

It had been a three-week trial but an 18-month nightmare for the 55-year-old, who stood accused on three counts of poisoning her daughter, who cannot be named for legal reasons, through unnecessary medication. She had been accused by prosecutors of “doctor shopping” by touring hospitals and clinics in Britain and abroad until she received a diagnosis for conditions which NHS tests showed were not present in her daughter.

In 2012 she travelled with her daughter, then 14, to the Brussels clinic of Dr Thierry Hertoghe, a Belgian physician and expert in hormone therapy, or so-called “anti-ageing medicine”, desperate for help. The girl was suffering from chronic fatigue syndrome that had left her virtually bedridden.

Dr Hertoghe said last night Ms Kidson’s trial “should never have taken place” and called for widespread NHS reform to allow parents greater choice over their child’s medical care.

“What a mess everyone has made,” he said from Brussels. “Two lives have been broken. I don’t think the NHS doctors who gave evidence [against me] are untypical of other doctors in the NHS in their way of thinking. The whole system needs reform. We have to give people the right to choose their doctor without fear of prosecution.

“What Mary and her daughter went through is exactly the same as what Ashya King and his family endured. Doctors are not gods; they can make faults. People shouldn’t have to go private and pay a lot of money for specialised treatment.”

RSNA Press Release

MRI Identifies Brain Abnormalities in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Patients

Released: October 29, 2014 

At A Glance
  • MRI showed that patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) had lower white matter volume and other abnormalities in their brains.
  • CFS is a debilitating disease, characterized by profound fatigue and brain fog that do not improve with bed rest, lasting for at least six months.
  • Currently, there is no standalone test for diagnosing CFS.
   RSNA Media Relations
Linda Brooks

OAK BROOK, Ill. — Researchers using a combination of different imaging techniques have found structural abnormalities in the brains of people with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), according to a new study published online in the journal Radiology. The results suggest a potential role for imaging in diagnosing and treating the condition.

CFS is characterized by profound fatigue and "brain fog" that do not improve with bed rest, lasting for at least six months. The condition affects more than 1 million adults and children in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Diagnosis is complicated and usually involves ruling out many other conditions. There is no standalone test to diagnose CFS.

Michael M. Zeineh, M.D., Ph.D.
 Michael M. Zeineh, M.D., Ph.D.

"This is a very common and debilitating disease," said the study lead author Michael M. Zeineh, M.D., Ph.D., assistant professor of radiology at Stanford University School of Medicine in Stanford, Calif. "It's very frustrating for patients, because they feel tired and are experiencing difficulty thinking, and the science has yet to determine what has gone wrong."

For the new study, Dr. Zeineh worked with a Stanford CFS and infectious disease expert, Jose G. Montoya, M.D., to perform magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on 15 CFS patients and 14 age- and gender-matched controls. They applied three different MRI techniques: volumetric analysis to measure the size of different compartments of the brain, diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) to assess the integrity of the signal-carrying white matter tracts of the brain, and arterial spin labeling (ASL) to measure blood flow.

When they compared results between the CFS patients and the controls, they found that the CFS group had slightly lower white matter volume, meaning there was less overall white matter in the brain. The CFS group also had abnormally high fractional anisotropy (FA) values—a DTI measure of the diffusion of water— in a specific white matter tract called the right arcuate fasciculus, suggesting something was going on in the white matter in the right hemisphere.

"Within CFS patients, right anterior arcuate FA increased with disease severity," Dr. Zeineh said. "The differences correlated with their fatigue—the more abnormal the tract, the worse the fatigue."

The results suggest that FA at the right arcuate fasciculus may serve as a biomarker for CFS that can help track the disease.

The imaging study also found abnormalities among CFS patients at the two points in the brain that connect the right arcuate fasciculus. Each connection point, known as a cortex, was thicker in CFS patients.

"This is the first study to look at white matter tracts in CFS and correlate them with cortical findings," Dr. Zeineh said. "It's not something you could see with conventional imaging."

Although the study involved only 15 CFS patients, the technique already shows tremendous promise as a diagnostic tool for identifying people with CFS, according to Dr. Zeineh.

"We used automated techniques to look at these tracts and were able to achieve 80 percent accuracy for CFS detection," he said.

Dr. Zeineh added that the findings need to be replicated and expanded upon in future studies to refine understanding of the relationship between brain structure and CFS.
"Right Arcuate Fasciculus Abnormality in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome." Collaborating with Drs. Zeineh and Montoya were James Kang, M.D., Scott W. Atlas, M.D., Mira M. Raman, M.S., Allan L. Reiss, M.D., Jane L Norris, P.A., and Ian Valencia, B.S.

Radiology is edited by Herbert Y. Kressel, M.D., Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass., and owned and published by the Radiological Society of North America, Inc. (
RSNA is an association of more than 53,000 radiologists, radiation oncologists, medical physicists and related scientists, promoting excellence in patient care and health care delivery through education, research and technologic innovation. The Society is based in Oak Brook, Ill. (
For patient-friendly information on MRI of the brain, visit
   Press Resources   Images (.JPG and .TIF format)

Figure 1. Superimposed on the inflated atlas brain image are regions of right-hemisphere increased cortical thickness in patients with CFS compared with control subjects after accounting for differences in age and handedness are highlighted in red (arrows). Blue = precentral, green = middle temporal, red = occipital, white = postcentral, and yellow = orbitofrontal. The right precentral region consists of two con¬nected foci that FreeSurfer identified as one contiguous region.

 High-res (TIF) version
(Right-click and Save As) Thumbnail
Figure 2. Reconstructed MR image shows the right arcuate (blue tracks and arrows) and ILFs (yellow tracks and arrows) in a single representative subject. These two tracks are overlaid on their respective track profiles. The track profile is colored according to the T score of track-based FA, showing that the maximal increase in FA is in the anterior arcuate and ILFs. The red, blue, and green spheres correspond to size and locations of increased cortical thickness from Figure 1 in the right occipital, precentral, and middle temporal regions, respectively. The green arrows also point to the middle temporal region of increased thickness.

 High-res (TIF) version
(Right-click and Save As)     
1-630-590-7738 (
Emma Day
1-630-590-7791 (
I agree with everything you said, Jerry.  It appears HHS has M.E. patients in a horrible Catch 22 situation in which they have defined the disease from which we suffer out of existence in the past, and they are attempting to do it again now.  At least some of us are protesting.  At least we can do that.  What is unimaginable to me is that our so-called patient organizations, CAA/SMCI and PANDORA, are supporting this.  And I believe much of the patient population would rather not be bothered to protest; they are sitting down and being quiet, as instructed by the phony "patient" organizations.  They may be sorry when they get the referral to a psychologist or psychiatrist to treat their M.E., but by then it will be too late.

Yes, it is very very important to stand up, speak up and protest in whatever way each and everyone of us can.

If ever there was a time to stand up, speak up and protest for TRUTH against CORRUPTION--for our health and, indeed, our very lives--the time is NOW!

And we also have a responsibility to get this right for today's youth and the next generation/s!!!

Come on -- 'buy a ticket' to effect our win at the lottery!!
Join in and speak up in PROTEST of the IOM and P2P!
Yes, it is.  Isn't she wonderful!

Yes, she truly is .  .  .  I miss her postings !!!
Here's a picture of the book, Plague. Pre-orders will be shipping soon, within the next couple days! I will be posting the exact shipping date here once it's been confirmed!
It's unfortunate that these findings weren't connected to the actual neurological disease myalgic encephalomyelitis, ME, instead of thin e CDC's unscientific chronic fatigue political construct. By the CDC's currently used 1994 definition, chronic fatigue syndrome is characterized by self-reported, unexplained chronic fatigue.

I agree with everything you said, Jerry.  It appears HHS has M.E. patients in a horrible Catch 22 situation in which they have defined the disease from which we suffer out of existence in the past, and they are attempting to do it again now.  At least some of us are protesting.  At least we can do that.  What is unimaginable to me is that our so-called patient organizations, CAA/SMCI and PANDORA, are supporting this.  And I believe much of the patient population would rather not be bothered to protest; they are sitting down and being quiet, as instructed by the phony "patient" organizations.  They may be sorry when they get the referral to a psychologist or psychiatrist to treat their M.E., but by then it will be too late.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10