|
|
Psychiatry's Front Groups
"Because of the financial incentives structured into the development
and use of DSM, decisions about which human problems get included as
mental disorders in DSM and who qualifies for the reimbursable
diagnostic label are vulnerable to pressure from advocacy groups, professional
associations, and corporations."59
Professors Herb Kutchins & Stuart A. Kirk
Authors, Making Us Crazy,
DSM: The Psychiatric Bible and
The Creation of Mental Disorders
The main organizations that are promoting psychiatry's drugs, the
biochemical imbalance theory or the fallacious ideas of "neurobiological
disease," receive huge grants from sources which profit from the
biological psychiatry model; namely drug interests. This funding, Dr.
Valenstein says, "enables the groups to increase newspaper and magazine
advertising and the information they distribute by other means. Typically,
patient advocacy materials have a pro-drug bias," which "exaggerate
and sometimes distort the effectiveness of drug treatment and what is known
about the relationship of brain chemistry to mental
illness."60
Front Group Workings

One national U.S. organization representing the families and friends of
the mentally illand which receives $3 million a year in pharmaceutical
funding61tells its chapters to "stop using the term
'mental illness.' Use terms that acknowledge biology. Terms like 'biologically
based brain disease,' 'neurobiological disorders' (NBD), or specific diagnoses
(schizophrenia, depression, etc.). Biological terms are more accurate, reduce
stigma and differentiate us."62
Critics claim this same organization is also in the pocket of New York
state psychiatric researchers and fails to make the protection of vulnerable
patients a priority.63 As of 1998, it also had 1,100 members of the
American Psychiatric Association as members.64
- These groups will assert with absolute certainty that a drug has saved
their child or friend's life by correcting the chemical imbalance responsible
for the mental condition. However, Valenstein says, "They were almost
surely repeating what they had read or what their psychiatrist had told them,
despite the fact the psychiatrist had no way of knowing if they really had a
biochemical imbalance."65
False psychiatric labels
pushed by "front"
groups are destroying
education
The United Nations International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) reported
that the activities of such groups might be undermining the Convention on
Psychotropic Substances, which prohibits the "advertisement of controlled
substances to the general public."66 Indeed, the DEA cited
Children and Adults with Attention Deficit Disorder (CHADD), stating that its
funding from companies supports a biopsychiatry drug model and may have
compromised it, especially when it mentions as a treatment option a specific
drug used almost universally for "ADHD." Gene Haislip, DEA diversion
control head, dubbed the relationship between one well-known drug manufacturer
and CHADD an "unhealthy co-mingling of medical and commercial
interests."67
Thomas Armstrong, Ph.D., an award-winning author and speaker on learning
and human development, stated: "In its search for a physical cause, the
ADD movement reached a milestone with the 1990 publication in the New
England Journal of Medicine of a study by Alan Zametkin and his colleagues
at the National Institute of Mental Health. This study appeared to link
hyperactivity in adults with reduced metabolism of glucose
in
areas
of the brain that are involved in the control of attention, planning and motor
activity.
"The media picked up on Zametkin's research and reported it
nationally. ADD proponents latched on to this study as 'proof' of the medical
basis for ADD... What was not reported by the media or cheered by the ADD
community was the study by Zametkin and the others that came out three years
later... In an attempt to repeat the 1990 study with adolescents, the
researchers found no significant differences between the brains of so-called
hyperactive subjects and those of so-called normal
subjects."68
|
|