A Beautiful Mind / Schizophrenia
Related Topics
th ...@btinternet.com (Theta)
Mind drugs may hinder recovery By Robert Whitaker USA TODAY March 4th 2002 The movie A Beautiful Mind, nominated for eight Academy Awards, has brought welcome attention to the fact that people can and do recover from schizophrenia, a severely disabling disorder that affects about one in 100 Americans. Unfortunately, the film fabricates a critical detail of John Nash's recovery and in so doing, obscures a question that should concern us all: Do the medications we use to treat schizophrenia promote long-term recovery -- or hinder it?
In the movie, Nash -- just before he receives a Nobel Prize -- speaks of taking ''newer medications.'' The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill has praised the film's director, Ron Howard, for showing the ''vital role of medication'' in Nash's recovery. But as Sylvia Nasar notes in her biography of Nash, on which the movie is loosely based, this brilliant mathematician stopped taking anti-psychotic drugs in 1970 and slowly recovered over two decades. Nasar concluded that Nash's refusal to take drugs ''may have been fortunate'' because their deleterious effects ''would have made his gentle re-entry into the world of mathematics a near impossibility.'' His is just one of many such cases. Most Americans are unaware that the World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly found that long-term schizophrenia outcomes are much worse in the USA and other ''developed'' countries than in poor ones such as India and Nigeria, where relatively few patients are on anti-psychotic medications. In ''undeveloped'' countries, nearly two-thirds of schizophrenia patients are doing fairly well five years after initial diagnosis; about 40% have basically recovered. But in the USA and other developed countries, most patients become chronically ill. The outcome differences are so marked that WHO concluded that living in a developed country is a ''strong predictor'' that a patient never will fully recover.
Myth of medication There is more. In 1987, psychologist Courtenay Harding reported that a third of chronic schizophrenia patients released from Vermont State Hospital in the late 1950s completely recovered. Everyone in this ''best-outcomes'' group shared one common factor: All had weaned themselves from anti-psychotic medications. The notion that schizophrenics must spend a lifetime on these drugs, she concluded, is a ''myth.'' In 1994, Harvard Medical School researchers found that outcomes for U.S. schizophrenia patients had worsened during the past 20 years and were now no better than they were 100 years earlier, when therapy involved plunking patients into bathtubs for hours. And in 1998, University of Pennsylvania investigators reported that standard anti-psychotic medications cause a specific area of the brain to become abnormally enlarged and that this drug-induced enlargement is ***ociated with a worsening of symptoms.
Comprehensive care succeeds All of this has led a few European physicians to explore non-drug alternatives. In Finland, doctors treat newly diagnosed schizophrenia patients with comprehensive care: counseling, social-support services and the selective use of anti-psychotic medications. Some patients do better on low doses of medication, and some without it. And they report great results: A majority of patients remain free of psychotic symptoms for extended periods and hold down jobs.
John Nash's recovery from schizophrenia is a moving story. But we are not well served when the movie fibs about the anti-psychotic drugs' role in his recovery. If anything, his story should inspire us to reconsider anti-psychotics' long-term efficacy with an honest, open mind. That would be a first step toward reforming our care -- and if there is one thing we can conclude from the WHO studies, it is that reform is vitally needed. Perhaps then we could even hope that schizophrenia outcomes in this country would improve to the point that they were equal to those in poor countries such as India and Nigeria.
--
Robert Whitaker is the author of Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill.
"Bill Hewitt" hewit...@hotmail.com
Of course they may, and many times do. P***ing out Ridilin like it's candy is one example.
--
Bill ...
"John McEnery" bigjo...@optonline.net
Hogwash "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message ...
Mind drugs may hinder recovery By Robert Whitaker USA TODAY March 4th 2002 The movie A Beautiful Mind, nominated for eight Academy Awards, has brought welcome attention to the fact that people can and do recover from schizophrenia, a severely disabling disorder that affects about one in 100 Americans. Unfortunately, the film fabricates a critical detail of John Nash's recovery and in so doing, obscures a question that should concern us all: Do the medications we use to treat schizophrenia promote long-term recovery -- or hinder it?
In the movie, Nash -- just before he receives a Nobel Prize -- speaks of taking ''newer medications.'' The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill has praised the film's director, Ron Howard, for showing the ''vital role of medication'' in Nash's recovery. But as Sylvia Nasar notes in her biography of Nash, on which the movie is loosely based, this brilliant mathematician stopped taking anti-psychotic drugs in 1970 and slowly recovered over two decades. Nasar concluded that Nash's refusal to take drugs ''may have been fortunate'' because their deleterious effects ''would have made his gentle re-entry into the world of mathematics a near impossibility.'' His is just one of many such cases. Most Americans are unaware that the World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly found that long-term schizophrenia outcomes are much worse in the USA and other ''developed'' countries than in poor ones such as India and Nigeria, where relatively few patients are on anti-psychotic medications. In ''undeveloped'' countries, nearly two-thirds of schizophrenia patients are doing fairly well five years after initial diagnosis; about 40% have basically recovered. But in the USA and other developed countries, most patients become chronically ill. The outcome differences are so marked that WHO concluded that living in a developed country is a ''strong predictor'' that a patient never will fully recover.
Myth of medication There is more. In 1987, psychologist Courtenay Harding reported that a third of chronic schizophrenia patients released from Vermont State Hospital in the late 1950s completely recovered. Everyone in this ''best-outcomes'' group shared one common factor: All had weaned themselves from anti-psychotic medications. The notion that schizophrenics must spend a lifetime on these drugs, she concluded, is a ''myth.'' In 1994, Harvard Medical School researchers found that outcomes for U.S. schizophrenia patients had worsened during the past 20 years and were now no better than they were 100 years earlier, when therapy involved plunking patients into bathtubs for hours. And in 1998, University of Pennsylvania investigators reported that standard anti-psychotic medications cause a specific area of the brain to become abnormally enlarged and that this drug-induced enlargement is ***ociated with a worsening of symptoms.
Comprehensive care succeeds All of this has led a few European physicians to explore non-drug alternatives. In Finland, doctors treat newly diagnosed schizophrenia patients with comprehensive care: counseling, social-support services and the selective use of anti-psychotic medications. Some patients do better on low doses of medication, and some without it. And they report great results: A majority of patients remain free of psychotic symptoms for extended periods and hold down jobs.
John Nash's recovery from schizophrenia is a moving story. But we are not well served when the movie fibs about the anti-psychotic drugs' role in his recovery. If anything, his story should inspire us to reconsider anti-psychotics' long-term efficacy with an honest, open mind. That would be a first step toward reforming our care -- and if there is one thing we can conclude from the WHO studies, it is that reform is vitally needed. Perhaps then we could even hope that schizophrenia outcomes in this country would improve to the point that they were equal to those in poor countries such as India and Nigeria.
--
Robert Whitaker is the author of Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill.
"Kiarnet" WyckedWytchsayonaraspam...@email.msn.com
Ritalin is very helpful to those who actually need the drug. There are other drugs, aside from Ritalin that are overprescribed to folks who don't really need them. Diet drugs are a prime example, antibiotics are another.
And this is where i'll end. i'm too close to this particular argument to be objective and or unemotional.
Kiarnet
--
Justice will only be achieved when those who are not injured by crime feel as indignant as those who are.
--Solomon 635-577 B.C.--
...
"Karyn" Karyn_Ca...@msn.com
You know I am with you on this.
--
Karyn ...
"John McEnery" bigjo...@optonline.net
As am I "Karyn" <Karyn_Ca...@msn.com> wrote in message ...
You know I am with you on this.
--
Karyn "Kiarnet" <WyckedWytchsayonaraspam...@email.msn.com> wrote in message ...
> Ritalin is very helpful to those who actually need the drug. There are > other drugs, aside from Ritalin that are overprescribed to folks who don't > really need them. Diet drugs are a prime example, antibiotics are another.
> > And this is where i'll end. i'm too close to this particular argument to be > objective and or unemotional.
> > Kiarnet > > > > --
> Justice will only be achieved when those who are not injured by crime feel > as indignant as those who are.
> --Solomon 635-577 B.C.--
> "Bill Hewitt" <hewit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > ...
> > Of course they may, and many times do. P***ing out Ridilin like it's > candy > > is one example.
> > > > --
> > Bill > > > > "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message > > ...
> > > Mind drugs may hinder recovery > > > > > > By Robert Whitaker > > > USA TODAY > > > > > > March 4th 2002 > > > > > > The movie A Beautiful Mind, nominated for eight Academy Awards, has > > > brought welcome attention to the fact that people can and do recover > > > from schizophrenia, a severely disabling disorder that affects about > > > one in 100 Americans. Unfortunately, the film fabricates a critical > > > detail of John Nash's recovery and in so doing, obscures a question > > > that should concern us all: Do the medications we use to treat > > > schizophrenia promote long-term recovery -- or hinder it?
> > > > > > In the movie, Nash -- just before he receives a Nobel Prize -- speaks > > > of taking ''newer medications.'' The National Alliance for the > > > Mentally Ill has praised the film's director, Ron Howard, for showing > > > the ''vital role of medication'' in Nash's recovery. But as Sylvia > > > Nasar notes in her biography of Nash, on which the movie is loosely > > > based, this brilliant mathematician stopped taking anti-psychotic > > > drugs in 1970 and slowly recovered over two decades. Nasar concluded > > > that Nash's refusal to take drugs ''may have been fortunate'' because > > > their deleterious effects ''would have made his gentle re-entry into > > > the world of mathematics a near impossibility.'' > > > > > > His is just one of many such cases. Most Americans are unaware that > > > the World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly found that > > > long-term schizophrenia outcomes are much worse in the USA and other > > > ''developed'' countries than in poor ones such as India and Nigeria, > > > where relatively few patients are on anti-psychotic medications. In > > > ''undeveloped'' countries, nearly two-thirds of schizophrenia patients > > > are doing fairly well five years after initial diagnosis; about 40% > > > have basically recovered. But in the USA and other developed > > > countries, most patients become chronically ill. The outcome > > > differences are so marked that WHO concluded that living in a > > > developed country is a ''strong predictor'' that a patient never will > > > fully recover.
> > > > > > Myth of medication > > > > > > There is more. In 1987, psychologist Courtenay Harding reported that a > > > third of chronic schizophrenia patients released from Vermont State > > > Hospital in the late 1950s completely recovered. Everyone in this > > > ''best-outcomes'' group shared one common factor: All had weaned > > > themselves from anti-psychotic medications. The notion that > > > schizophrenics must spend a lifetime on these drugs, she concluded, is > > > a ''myth.'' > > > > > > In 1994, Harvard Medical School researchers found that outcomes for > > > U.S. schizophrenia patients had worsened during the past 20 years and > > > were now no better than they were 100 years earlier, when therapy > > > involved plunking patients into bathtubs for hours. And in 1998, > > > University of Pennsylvania investigators reported that standard > > > anti-psychotic medications cause a specific area of the brain to > > > become abnormally enlarged and that this drug-induced enlargement is > > > ***ociated with a worsening of symptoms.
> > > > > > Comprehensive care succeeds > > > > > > All of this has led a few European physicians to explore non-drug > > > alternatives. In Finland, doctors treat newly diagnosed schizophrenia > > > patients with comprehensive care: counseling, social-support services > > > and the selective use of anti-psychotic medications. Some patients do > > > better on low doses of medication, and some without it. And they > > > report great results: A majority of patients remain free of psychotic > > > symptoms for extended periods and hold down jobs.
> > > > > > John Nash's recovery from schizophrenia is a moving story. But we are > > > not well served when the movie fibs about the anti-psychotic drugs' > > > role in his recovery. If anything, his story should inspire us to > > > reconsider anti-psychotics' long-term efficacy with an honest, open > > > mind. That would be a first step toward reforming our care -- and if > > > there is one thing we can conclude from the WHO studies, it is that > > > reform is vitally needed. Perhaps then we could even hope that > > > schizophrenia outcomes in this country would improve to the point that > > > they were equal to those in poor countries such as India and Nigeria.
> > > > > > --
> > > Robert Whitaker is the author of Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad > > > Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill.
> > > > > >
"Bill Hewitt" hewit...@hotmail.com
You don't think that drugs are overused, John?
--
Bill "John McEnery" <bigjo...@optonline.net> wrote in message ...
Hogwash "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message ...
Mind drugs may hinder recovery By Robert Whitaker USA TODAY March 4th 2002 The movie A Beautiful Mind, nominated for eight Academy Awards, has brought welcome attention to the fact that people can and do recover from schizophrenia, a severely disabling disorder that affects about one in 100 Americans. Unfortunately, the film fabricates a critical detail of John Nash's recovery and in so doing, obscures a question that should concern us all: Do the medications we use to treat schizophrenia promote long-term recovery -- or hinder it?
In the movie, Nash -- just before he receives a Nobel Prize -- speaks of taking ''newer medications.'' The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill has praised the film's director, Ron Howard, for showing the ''vital role of medication'' in Nash's recovery. But as Sylvia Nasar notes in her biography of Nash, on which the movie is loosely based, this brilliant mathematician stopped taking anti-psychotic drugs in 1970 and slowly recovered over two decades. Nasar concluded that Nash's refusal to take drugs ''may have been fortunate'' because their deleterious effects ''would have made his gentle re-entry into the world of mathematics a near impossibility.'' His is just one of many such cases. Most Americans are unaware that the World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly found that long-term schizophrenia outcomes are much worse in the USA and other ''developed'' countries than in poor ones such as India and Nigeria, where relatively few patients are on anti-psychotic medications. In ''undeveloped'' countries, nearly two-thirds of schizophrenia patients are doing fairly well five years after initial diagnosis; about 40% have basically recovered. But in the USA and other developed countries, most patients become chronically ill. The outcome differences are so marked that WHO concluded that living in a developed country is a ''strong predictor'' that a patient never will fully recover.
Myth of medication There is more. In 1987, psychologist Courtenay Harding reported that a third of chronic schizophrenia patients released from Vermont State Hospital in the late 1950s completely recovered. Everyone in this ''best-outcomes'' group shared one common factor: All had weaned themselves from anti-psychotic medications. The notion that schizophrenics must spend a lifetime on these drugs, she concluded, is a ''myth.'' In 1994, Harvard Medical School researchers found that outcomes for U.S. schizophrenia patients had worsened during the past 20 years and were now no better than they were 100 years earlier, when therapy involved plunking patients into bathtubs for hours. And in 1998, University of Pennsylvania investigators reported that standard anti-psychotic medications cause a specific area of the brain to become abnormally enlarged and that this drug-induced enlargement is ***ociated with a worsening of symptoms.
Comprehensive care succeeds All of this has led a few European physicians to explore non-drug alternatives. In Finland, doctors treat newly diagnosed schizophrenia patients with comprehensive care: counseling, social-support services and the selective use of anti-psychotic medications. Some patients do better on low doses of medication, and some without it. And they report great results: A majority of patients remain free of psychotic symptoms for extended periods and hold down jobs.
John Nash's recovery from schizophrenia is a moving story. But we are not well served when the movie fibs about the anti-psychotic drugs' role in his recovery. If anything, his story should inspire us to reconsider anti-psychotics' long-term efficacy with an honest, open mind. That would be a first step toward reforming our care -- and if there is one thing we can conclude from the WHO studies, it is that reform is vitally needed. Perhaps then we could even hope that schizophrenia outcomes in this country would improve to the point that they were equal to those in poor countries such as India and Nigeria.
--
Robert Whitaker is the author of Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill.
"Dennis" denni...@pacbell.net
Hogwash is that like mouth wash ?
"John McEnery" <bigjo...@optonline.net> wrote in message ...
Hogwash "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message ...
Mind drugs may hinder recovery By Robert Whitaker USA TODAY March 4th 2002 The movie A Beautiful Mind, nominated for eight Academy Awards, has brought welcome attention to the fact that people can and do recover from schizophrenia, a severely disabling disorder that affects about one in 100 Americans. Unfortunately, the film fabricates a critical detail of John Nash's recovery and in so doing, obscures a question that should concern us all: Do the medications we use to treat schizophrenia promote long-term recovery -- or hinder it?
In the movie, Nash -- just before he receives a Nobel Prize -- speaks of taking ''newer medications.'' The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill has praised the film's director, Ron Howard, for showing the ''vital role of medication'' in Nash's recovery. But as Sylvia Nasar notes in her biography of Nash, on which the movie is loosely based, this brilliant mathematician stopped taking anti-psychotic drugs in 1970 and slowly recovered over two decades. Nasar concluded that Nash's refusal to take drugs ''may have been fortunate'' because their deleterious effects ''would have made his gentle re-entry into the world of mathematics a near impossibility.'' His is just one of many such cases. Most Americans are unaware that the World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly found that long-term schizophrenia outcomes are much worse in the USA and other ''developed'' countries than in poor ones such as India and Nigeria, where relatively few patients are on anti-psychotic medications. In ''undeveloped'' countries, nearly two-thirds of schizophrenia patients are doing fairly well five years after initial diagnosis; about 40% have basically recovered. But in the USA and other developed countries, most patients become chronically ill. The outcome differences are so marked that WHO concluded that living in a developed country is a ''strong predictor'' that a patient never will fully recover.
Myth of medication There is more. In 1987, psychologist Courtenay Harding reported that a third of chronic schizophrenia patients released from Vermont State Hospital in the late 1950s completely recovered. Everyone in this ''best-outcomes'' group shared one common factor: All had weaned themselves from anti-psychotic medications. The notion that schizophrenics must spend a lifetime on these drugs, she concluded, is a ''myth.'' In 1994, Harvard Medical School researchers found that outcomes for U.S. schizophrenia patients had worsened during the past 20 years and were now no better than they were 100 years earlier, when therapy involved plunking patients into bathtubs for hours. And in 1998, University of Pennsylvania investigators reported that standard anti-psychotic medications cause a specific area of the brain to become abnormally enlarged and that this drug-induced enlargement is ***ociated with a worsening of symptoms.
Comprehensive care succeeds All of this has led a few European physicians to explore non-drug alternatives. In Finland, doctors treat newly diagnosed schizophrenia patients with comprehensive care: counseling, social-support services and the selective use of anti-psychotic medications. Some patients do better on low doses of medication, and some without it. And they report great results: A majority of patients remain free of psychotic symptoms for extended periods and hold down jobs.
John Nash's recovery from schizophrenia is a moving story. But we are not well served when the movie fibs about the anti-psychotic drugs' role in his recovery. If anything, his story should inspire us to reconsider anti-psychotics' long-term efficacy with an honest, open mind. That would be a first step toward reforming our care -- and if there is one thing we can conclude from the WHO studies, it is that reform is vitally needed. Perhaps then we could even hope that schizophrenia outcomes in this country would improve to the point that they were equal to those in poor countries such as India and Nigeria.
--
Robert Whitaker is the author of Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill.
"John McEnery" bigjo...@optonline.net
Some are...but I am suspicious when a Scientologist starts beating the anti-psychiatry drum...since they are selling a competing approach John "Bill Hewitt" <hewit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message ...
You don't think that drugs are overused, John?
--
Bill "John McEnery" <bigjo...@optonline.net> wrote in message ...
Hogwash "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message ...
Mind drugs may hinder recovery By Robert Whitaker USA TODAY March 4th 2002 The movie A Beautiful Mind, nominated for eight Academy Awards, has brought welcome attention to the fact that people can and do recover from schizophrenia, a severely disabling disorder that affects about one in 100 Americans. Unfortunately, the film fabricates a critical detail of John Nash's recovery and in so doing, obscures a question that should concern us all: Do the medications we use to treat schizophrenia promote long-term recovery -- or hinder it?
In the movie, Nash -- just before he receives a Nobel Prize -- speaks of taking ''newer medications.'' The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill has praised the film's director, Ron Howard, for showing the ''vital role of medication'' in Nash's recovery. But as Sylvia Nasar notes in her biography of Nash, on which the movie is loosely based, this brilliant mathematician stopped taking anti-psychotic drugs in 1970 and slowly recovered over two decades. Nasar concluded that Nash's refusal to take drugs ''may have been fortunate'' because their deleterious effects ''would have made his gentle re-entry into the world of mathematics a near impossibility.'' His is just one of many such cases. Most Americans are unaware that the World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly found that long-term schizophrenia outcomes are much worse in the USA and other ''developed'' countries than in poor ones such as India and Nigeria, where relatively few patients are on anti-psychotic medications. In ''undeveloped'' countries, nearly two-thirds of schizophrenia patients are doing fairly well five years after initial diagnosis; about 40% have basically recovered. But in the USA and other developed countries, most patients become chronically ill. The outcome differences are so marked that WHO concluded that living in a developed country is a ''strong predictor'' that a patient never will fully recover.
Myth of medication There is more. In 1987, psychologist Courtenay Harding reported that a third of chronic schizophrenia patients released from Vermont State Hospital in the late 1950s completely recovered. Everyone in this ''best-outcomes'' group shared one common factor: All had weaned themselves from anti-psychotic medications. The notion that schizophrenics must spend a lifetime on these drugs, she concluded, is a ''myth.'' In 1994, Harvard Medical School researchers found that outcomes for U.S. schizophrenia patients had worsened during the past 20 years and were now no better than they were 100 years earlier, when therapy involved plunking patients into bathtubs for hours. And in 1998, University of Pennsylvania investigators reported that standard anti-psychotic medications cause a specific area of the brain to become abnormally enlarged and that this drug-induced enlargement is ***ociated with a worsening of symptoms.
Comprehensive care succeeds All of this has led a few European physicians to explore non-drug alternatives. In Finland, doctors treat newly diagnosed schizophrenia patients with comprehensive care: counseling, social-support services and the selective use of anti-psychotic medications. Some patients do better on low doses of medication, and some without it. And they report great results: A majority of patients remain free of psychotic symptoms for extended periods and hold down jobs.
John Nash's recovery from schizophrenia is a moving story. But we are not well served when the movie fibs about the anti-psychotic drugs' role in his recovery. If anything, his story should inspire us to reconsider anti-psychotics' long-term efficacy with an honest, open mind. That would be a first step toward reforming our care -- and if there is one thing we can conclude from the WHO studies, it is that reform is vitally needed. Perhaps then we could even hope that schizophrenia outcomes in this country would improve to the point that they were equal to those in poor countries such as India and Nigeria.
--
Robert Whitaker is the author of Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill.
"John McEnery" bigjo...@optonline.net
No...it's dirty water...very dirty "Dennis" <denni...@pacbell.net> wrote in message ...
Hogwash is that like mouth wash ?
"John McEnery" <bigjo...@optonline.net> wrote in message ...
Hogwash "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message ...
Mind drugs may hinder recovery By Robert Whitaker USA TODAY March 4th 2002 The movie A Beautiful Mind, nominated for eight Academy Awards, has brought welcome attention to the fact that people can and do recover from schizophrenia, a severely disabling disorder that affects about one in 100 Americans. Unfortunately, the film fabricates a critical detail of John Nash's recovery and in so doing, obscures a question that should concern us all: Do the medications we use to treat schizophrenia promote long-term recovery -- or hinder it?
In the movie, Nash -- just before he receives a Nobel Prize -- speaks of taking ''newer medications.'' The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill has praised the film's director, Ron Howard, for showing the ''vital role of medication'' in Nash's recovery. But as Sylvia Nasar notes in her biography of Nash, on which the movie is loosely based, this brilliant mathematician stopped taking anti-psychotic drugs in 1970 and slowly recovered over two decades. Nasar concluded that Nash's refusal to take drugs ''may have been fortunate'' because their deleterious effects ''would have made his gentle re-entry into the world of mathematics a near impossibility.'' His is just one of many such cases. Most Americans are unaware that the World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly found that long-term schizophrenia outcomes are much worse in the USA and other ''developed'' countries than in poor ones such as India and Nigeria, where relatively few patients are on anti-psychotic medications. In ''undeveloped'' countries, nearly two-thirds of schizophrenia patients are doing fairly well five years after initial diagnosis; about 40% have basically recovered. But in the USA and other developed countries, most patients become chronically ill. The outcome differences are so marked that WHO concluded that living in a developed country is a ''strong predictor'' that a patient never will fully recover.
Myth of medication There is more. In 1987, psychologist Courtenay Harding reported that a third of chronic schizophrenia patients released from Vermont State Hospital in the late 1950s completely recovered. Everyone in this ''best-outcomes'' group shared one common factor: All had weaned themselves from anti-psychotic medications. The notion that schizophrenics must spend a lifetime on these drugs, she concluded, is a ''myth.'' In 1994, Harvard Medical School researchers found that outcomes for U.S. schizophrenia patients had worsened during the past 20 years and were now no better than they were 100 years earlier, when therapy involved plunking patients into bathtubs for hours. And in 1998, University of Pennsylvania investigators reported that standard anti-psychotic medications cause a specific area of the brain to become abnormally enlarged and that this drug-induced enlargement is ***ociated with a worsening of symptoms.
Comprehensive care succeeds All of this has led a few European physicians to explore non-drug alternatives. In Finland, doctors treat newly diagnosed schizophrenia patients with comprehensive care: counseling, social-support services and the selective use of anti-psychotic medications. Some patients do better on low doses of medication, and some without it. And they report great results: A majority of patients remain free of psychotic symptoms for extended periods and hold down jobs.
John Nash's recovery from schizophrenia is a moving story. But we are not well served when the movie fibs about the anti-psychotic drugs' role in his recovery. If anything, his story should inspire us to reconsider anti-psychotics' long-term efficacy with an honest, open mind. That would be a first step toward reforming our care -- and if there is one thing we can conclude from the WHO studies, it is that reform is vitally needed. Perhaps then we could even hope that schizophrenia outcomes in this country would improve to the point that they were equal to those in poor countries such as India and Nigeria.
--
Robert Whitaker is the author of Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill.
"Bill Hewitt" hewit...@hotmail.com
I tend to be suspicious when they start beating any drum.
--
Bill "John McEnery" <bigjo...@optonline.net> wrote in message ...
Some are...but I am suspicious when a Scientologist starts beating the anti-psychiatry drum...since they are selling a competing approach John "Bill Hewitt" <hewit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message ...
You don't think that drugs are overused, John?
--
Bill "John McEnery" <bigjo...@optonline.net> wrote in message ...
Hogwash "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message ...
Mind drugs may hinder recovery By Robert Whitaker USA TODAY March 4th 2002 The movie A Beautiful Mind, nominated for eight Academy Awards, has brought welcome attention to the fact that people can and do recover from schizophrenia, a severely disabling disorder that affects about one in 100 Americans. Unfortunately, the film fabricates a critical detail of John Nash's recovery and in so doing, obscures a question that should concern us all: Do the medications we use to treat schizophrenia promote long-term recovery -- or hinder it?
In the movie, Nash -- just before he receives a Nobel Prize -- speaks of taking ''newer medications.'' The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill has praised the film's director, Ron Howard, for showing the ''vital role of medication'' in Nash's recovery. But as Sylvia Nasar notes in her biography of Nash, on which the movie is loosely based, this brilliant mathematician stopped taking anti-psychotic drugs in 1970 and slowly recovered over two decades. Nasar concluded that Nash's refusal to take drugs ''may have been fortunate'' because their deleterious effects ''would have made his gentle re-entry into the world of mathematics a near impossibility.'' His is just one of many such cases. Most Americans are unaware that the World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly found that long-term schizophrenia outcomes are much worse in the USA and other ''developed'' countries than in poor ones such as India and Nigeria, where relatively few patients are on anti-psychotic medications. In ''undeveloped'' countries, nearly two-thirds of schizophrenia patients are doing fairly well five years after initial diagnosis; about 40% have basically recovered. But in the USA and other developed countries, most patients become chronically ill. The outcome differences are so marked that WHO concluded that living in a developed country is a ''strong predictor'' that a patient never will fully recover.
Myth of medication There is more. In 1987, psychologist Courtenay Harding reported that a third of chronic schizophrenia patients released from Vermont State Hospital in the late 1950s completely recovered. Everyone in this ''best-outcomes'' group shared one common factor: All had weaned themselves from anti-psychotic medications. The notion that schizophrenics must spend a lifetime on these drugs, she concluded, is a ''myth.'' In 1994, Harvard Medical School researchers found that outcomes for U.S. schizophrenia patients had worsened during the past 20 years and were now no better than they were 100 years earlier, when therapy involved plunking patients into bathtubs for hours. And in 1998, University of Pennsylvania investigators reported that standard anti-psychotic medications cause a specific area of the brain to become abnormally enlarged and that this drug-induced enlargement is ***ociated with a worsening of symptoms.
Comprehensive care succeeds All of this has led a few European physicians to explore non-drug alternatives. In Finland, doctors treat newly diagnosed schizophrenia patients with comprehensive care: counseling, social-support services and the selective use of anti-psychotic medications. Some patients do better on low doses of medication, and some without it. And they report great results: A majority of patients remain free of psychotic symptoms for extended periods and hold down jobs.
John Nash's recovery from schizophrenia is a moving story. But we are not well served when the movie fibs about the anti-psychotic drugs' role in his recovery. If anything, his story should inspire us to reconsider anti-psychotics' long-term efficacy with an honest, open mind. That would be a first step toward reforming our care -- and if there is one thing we can conclude from the WHO studies, it is that reform is vitally needed. Perhaps then we could even hope that schizophrenia outcomes in this country would improve to the point that they were equal to those in poor countries such as India and Nigeria.
--
Robert Whitaker is the author of Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill.
th ...@btinternet.com (Theta)
It's easier to simply dismiss an argument as 'hogwash' if you have no facts to counter it.
Mike
th ...@btinternet.com (Theta)
Exactly. Children as young as 3 are being pushed 'kiddie cocaine' Ritalin. Not only is it tragic but it is 100% fraudulent. ADHD is not a neurological disorder! There is no scientific evidence or valid method of testing that proves that ADHD, as a mental 'disease', actually exists.
http://www.drugawareness.org http://www.adhdfraud.org http://www.fightforkids.org http://www.ritalindeath.com/ Mike
"Bill Hewitt" hewit...@hotmail.com
There are a body of respected people who believe that ADHD is usually the result of a very intelligent kid being bored. The dumbing down of our schools exacerbates the problem.
--
Bill ...
<>...
"Karyn" Karyn_Ca...@msn.com
People with ADHD know better.
--
Karyn ...
"Naked_Apes" naked_a...@msn.com
This is a Faith forum. Who needs facts? Ape;)) ...
<>...
"Naked_Apes" naked_a...@msn.com
That may have been me, and luckily, my only medication was television.)) Ape, the "Absent Minded Professor." ...
"Bill Hewitt" hewit...@hotmail.com
No, Karyn, I do not.
--
Bill ...
"Naked_Apes" naked_a...@msn.com
:) ...
"Dennis" denni...@pacbell.net
LOL------
...
"John McEnery" bigjo...@optonline.net
Sort of non-responsive there, wouldn't you say?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message ...
It's easier to simply dismiss an argument as 'hogwash' if you have no facts to counter it.
Mike "John McEnery" <bigjo...@optonline.net> wrote in message <>...
> Some are...but I am suspicious when a Scientologist starts beating the > anti-psychiatry drum...since they are selling a competing approach > John > "Bill Hewitt" <hewitt b...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:28yj8.204$ G3.171...@newsfeed.slurp.net...
> You don't think that drugs are overused, John?
> > --
> Bill > "John McEnery" <bigjo...@optonline.net> wrote in message > ...
> Hogwash > "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message > ...
> Mind drugs may hinder recovery > > By Robert Whitaker > USA TODAY > > March 4th 2002 > > The movie A Beautiful Mind, nominated for eight Academy Awards, > has > brought welcome attention to the fact that people can and do > recover > from schizophrenia, a severely disabling disorder that affects > about > one in 100 Americans. Unfortunately, the film fabricates a > critical > detail of John Nash's recovery and in so doing, obscures a > question > that should concern us all: Do the medications we use to treat > schizophrenia promote long-term recovery -- or hinder it?
> > In the movie, Nash -- just before he receives a Nobel Prize --
> speaks > of taking ''newer medications.'' The National Alliance for the > Mentally Ill has praised the film's director, Ron Howard, for > showing > the ''vital role of medication'' in Nash's recovery. But as Sylvia > Nasar notes in her biography of Nash, on which the movie is > loosely > based, this brilliant mathematician stopped taking anti-psychotic > drugs in 1970 and slowly recovered over two decades. Nasar > concluded > that Nash's refusal to take drugs ''may have been fortunate'' > because > their deleterious effects ''would have made his gentle re-entry > into > the world of mathematics a near impossibility.'' > > His is just one of many such cases. Most Americans are unaware > that > the World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly found that > long-term schizophrenia outcomes are much worse in the USA and > other > ''developed'' countries than in poor ones such as India and > Nigeria, > where relatively few patients are on anti-psychotic medications.
> In > ''undeveloped'' countries, nearly two-thirds of schizophrenia > patients > are doing fairly well five years after initial diagnosis; about > 40% > have basically recovered. But in the USA and other developed > countries, most patients become chronically ill. The outcome > differences are so marked that WHO concluded that living in a > developed country is a ''strong predictor'' that a patient never > will > fully recover.
> > Myth of medication > > There is more. In 1987, psychologist Courtenay Harding reported > that a > third of chronic schizophrenia patients released from Vermont > State > Hospital in the late 1950s completely recovered. Everyone in this > ''best-outcomes'' group shared one common factor: All had weaned > themselves from anti-psychotic medications. The notion that > schizophrenics must spend a lifetime on these drugs, she > concluded, is > a ''myth.'' > > In 1994, Harvard Medical School researchers found that outcomes > for > U.S. schizophrenia patients had worsened during the past 20 years > and > were now no better than they were 100 years earlier, when therapy > involved plunking patients into bathtubs for hours. And in 1998, > University of Pennsylvania investigators reported that standard > anti-psychotic medications cause a specific area of the brain to > become abnormally enlarged and that this drug-induced enlargement > is > ***ociated with a worsening of symptoms.
> > Comprehensive care succeeds > > All of this has led a few European physicians to explore non-drug > alternatives. In Finland, doctors treat newly diagnosed > schizophrenia > patients with comprehensive care: counseling, social-support > services > and the selective use of anti-psychotic medications. Some patients > do > better on low doses of medication, and some without it. And they > report great results: A majority of patients remain free of > psychotic > symptoms for extended periods and hold down jobs.
> > John Nash's recovery from schizophrenia is a moving story. But we > are > not well served when the movie fibs about the anti-psychotic > drugs' > role in his recovery. If anything, his story should inspire us to > reconsider anti-psychotics' long-term efficacy with an honest, > open > mind. That would be a first step toward reforming our care -- and > if > there is one thing we can conclude from the WHO studies, it is > that > reform is vitally needed. Perhaps then we could even hope that > schizophrenia outcomes in this country would improve to the point > that > they were equal to those in poor countries such as India and > Nigeria.
> > --
> Robert Whitaker is the author of Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad > Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill.
> > --
"John McEnery" bigjo...@optonline.net
None of those sources inspire much confidence in one seeking the truth "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message ...
Exactly. Children as young as 3 are being pushed 'kiddie cocaine' Ritalin. Not only is it tragic but it is 100% fraudulent. ADHD is not a neurological disorder! There is no scientific evidence or valid method of testing that proves that ADHD, as a mental 'disease', actually exists.
http://www.drugawareness.org http://www.adhdfraud.org http://www.fightforkids.org http://www.ritalindeath.com/ Mike "Bill Hewitt" <hewit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message <>...
> Of course they may, and many times do. P***ing out Ridilin like it's candy > is one example.
> > --
> Bill > > "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message > ...
> > Mind drugs may hinder recovery > > > > By Robert Whitaker > > USA TODAY > > > > March 4th 2002 > > > > The movie A Beautiful Mind, nominated for eight Academy Awards, has > > brought welcome attention to the fact that people can and do recover > > from schizophrenia, a severely disabling disorder that affects about > > one in 100 Americans. Unfortunately, the film fabricates a critical > > detail of John Nash's recovery and in so doing, obscures a question > > that should concern us all: Do the medications we use to treat > > schizophrenia promote long-term recovery -- or hinder it?
> > > > In the movie, Nash -- just before he receives a Nobel Prize -- speaks > > of taking ''newer medications.'' The National Alliance for the > > Mentally Ill has praised the film's director, Ron Howard, for showing > > the ''vital role of medication'' in Nash's recovery. But as Sylvia > > Nasar notes in her biography of Nash, on which the movie is loosely > > based, this brilliant mathematician stopped taking anti-psychotic > > drugs in 1970 and slowly recovered over two decades. Nasar concluded > > that Nash's refusal to take drugs ''may have been fortunate'' because > > their deleterious effects ''would have made his gentle re-entry into > > the world of mathematics a near impossibility.'' > > > > His is just one of many such cases. Most Americans are unaware that > > the World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly found that > > long-term schizophrenia outcomes are much worse in the USA and other > > ''developed'' countries than in poor ones such as India and Nigeria, > > where relatively few patients are on anti-psychotic medications. In > > ''undeveloped'' countries, nearly two-thirds of schizophrenia patients > > are doing fairly well five years after initial diagnosis; about 40% > > have basically recovered. But in the USA and other developed > > countries, most patients become chronically ill. The outcome > > differences are so marked that WHO concluded that living in a > > developed country is a ''strong predictor'' that a patient never will > > fully recover.
> > > > Myth of medication > > > > There is more. In 1987, psychologist Courtenay Harding reported that a > > third of chronic schizophrenia patients released from Vermont State > > Hospital in the late 1950s completely recovered. Everyone in this > > ''best-outcomes'' group shared one common factor: All had weaned > > themselves from anti-psychotic medications. The notion that > > schizophrenics must spend a lifetime on these drugs, she concluded, is > > a ''myth.'' > > > > In 1994, Harvard Medical School researchers found that outcomes for > > U.S. schizophrenia patients had worsened during the past 20 years and > > were now no better than they were 100 years earlier, when therapy > > involved plunking patients into bathtubs for hours. And in 1998, > > University of Pennsylvania investigators reported that standard > > anti-psychotic medications cause a specific area of the brain to > > become abnormally enlarged and that this drug-induced enlargement is > > ***ociated with a worsening of symptoms.
> > > > Comprehensive care succeeds > > > > All of this has led a few European physicians to explore non-drug > > alternatives. In Finland, doctors treat newly diagnosed schizophrenia > > patients with comprehensive care: counseling, social-support services > > and the selective use of anti-psychotic medications. Some patients do > > better on low doses of medication, and some without it. And they > > report great results: A majority of patients remain free of psychotic > > symptoms for extended periods and hold down jobs.
> > > > John Nash's recovery from schizophrenia is a moving story. But we are > > not well served when the movie fibs about the anti-psychotic drugs' > > role in his recovery. If anything, his story should inspire us to > > reconsider anti-psychotics' long-term efficacy with an honest, open > > mind. That would be a first step toward reforming our care -- and if > > there is one thing we can conclude from the WHO studies, it is that > > reform is vitally needed. Perhaps then we could even hope that > > schizophrenia outcomes in this country would improve to the point that > > they were equal to those in poor countries such as India and Nigeria.
> > > > --
> > Robert Whitaker is the author of Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad > > Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill.
"John McEnery" bigjo...@optonline.net
As the father of a child ( now at his mid century mark and retired from the USN) who was diagnosed as ADHD and treated for it and as a professional who worked with Handicapped Children for many years ...I believe you might wish to get some facts from uninterested sources.
John "Bill Hewitt" <hewit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message ...
There are a body of respected people who believe that ADHD is usually the result of a very intelligent kid being bored. The dumbing down of our schools exacerbates the problem.
--
Bill "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message ...
> Exactly. Children as young as 3 are being pushed 'kiddie cocaine' > Ritalin. Not only is it tragic but it is 100% fraudulent. ADHD is not > a neurological disorder! There is no scientific evidence or valid > method of testing that proves that ADHD, as a mental 'disease', > actually exists.
> > http://www.drugawareness.org > http://www.adhdfraud.org > http://www.fightforkids.org > http://www.ritalindeath.com/ > > Mike > > > "Bill Hewitt" <hewit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message <>...
> > Of course they may, and many times do. P***ing out Ridilin like it's candy > > is one example.
> > > > --
> > Bill > > > > "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message > > ...
> > > Mind drugs may hinder recovery > > > > > > By Robert Whitaker > > > USA TODAY > > > > > > March 4th 2002 > > > > > > The movie A Beautiful Mind, nominated for eight Academy Awards, has > > > brought welcome attention to the fact that people can and do recover > > > from schizophrenia, a severely disabling disorder that affects about > > > one in 100 Americans. Unfortunately, the film fabricates a critical > > > detail of John Nash's recovery and in so doing, obscures a question > > > that should concern us all: Do the medications we use to treat > > > schizophrenia promote long-term recovery -- or hinder it?
> > > > > > In the movie, Nash -- just before he receives a Nobel Prize -- speaks > > > of taking ''newer medications.'' The National Alliance for the > > > Mentally Ill has praised the film's director, Ron Howard, for showing > > > the ''vital role of medication'' in Nash's recovery. But as Sylvia > > > Nasar notes in her biography of Nash, on which the movie is loosely > > > based, this brilliant mathematician stopped taking anti-psychotic > > > drugs in 1970 and slowly recovered over two decades. Nasar concluded > > > that Nash's refusal to take drugs ''may have been fortunate'' because > > > their deleterious effects ''would have made his gentle re-entry into > > > the world of mathematics a near impossibility.'' > > > > > > His is just one of many such cases. Most Americans are unaware that > > > the World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly found that > > > long-term schizophrenia outcomes are much worse in the USA and other > > > ''developed'' countries than in poor ones such as India and Nigeria, > > > where relatively few patients are on anti-psychotic medications. In > > > ''undeveloped'' countries, nearly two-thirds of schizophrenia patients > > > are doing fairly well five years after initial diagnosis; about 40% > > > have basically recovered. But in the USA and other developed > > > countries, most patients become chronically ill. The outcome > > > differences are so marked that WHO concluded that living in a > > > developed country is a ''strong predictor'' that a patient never will > > > fully recover.
> > > > > > Myth of medication > > > > > > There is more. In 1987, psychologist Courtenay Harding reported that a > > > third of chronic schizophrenia patients released from Vermont State > > > Hospital in the late 1950s completely recovered. Everyone in this > > > ''best-outcomes'' group shared one common factor: All had weaned > > > themselves from anti-psychotic medications. The notion that > > > schizophrenics must spend a lifetime on these drugs, she concluded, is > > > a ''myth.'' > > > > > > In 1994, Harvard Medical School researchers found that outcomes for > > > U.S. schizophrenia patients had worsened during the past 20 years and > > > were now no better than they were 100 years earlier, when therapy > > > involved plunking patients into bathtubs for hours. And in 1998, > > > University of Pennsylvania investigators reported that standard > > > anti-psychotic medications cause a specific area of the brain to > > > become abnormally enlarged and that this drug-induced enlargement is > > > ***ociated with a worsening of symptoms.
> > > > > > Comprehensive care succeeds > > > > > > All of this has led a few European physicians to explore non-drug > > > alternatives. In Finland, doctors treat newly diagnosed schizophrenia > > > patients with comprehensive care: counseling, social-support services > > > and the selective use of anti-psychotic medications. Some patients do > > > better on low doses of medication, and some without it. And they > > > report great results: A majority of patients remain free of psychotic > > > symptoms for extended periods and hold down jobs.
> > > > > > John Nash's recovery from schizophrenia is a moving story. But we are > > > not well served when the movie fibs about the anti-psychotic drugs' > > > role in his recovery. If anything, his story should inspire us to > > > reconsider anti-psychotics' long-term efficacy with an honest, open > > > mind. That would be a first step toward reforming our care -- and if > > > there is one thing we can conclude from the WHO studies, it is that > > > reform is vitally needed. Perhaps then we could even hope that > > > schizophrenia outcomes in this country would improve to the point that > > > they were equal to those in poor countries such as India and Nigeria.
> > > > > > --
> > > Robert Whitaker is the author of Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad > > > Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill.
"John McEnery" bigjo...@optonline.net
They are somewhat superior to airy speculation which purports to to contradict them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Naked_Apes" <naked_a...@msn.com> wrote in message ...
This is a Faith forum. Who needs facts? Ape;)) "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message ...
> It's easier to simply dismiss an argument as 'hogwash' if you have no > facts to counter it.
> > Mike > > > "John McEnery" <bigjo...@optonline.net> wrote in message <>...
> > Some are...but I am suspicious when a Scientologist starts beating the > > anti-psychiatry drum...since they are selling a competing approach > > John > > "Bill Hewitt" <hewitt b...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:28yj8.204$ G3.171...@newsfeed.slurp.net...
> > You don't think that drugs are overused, John?
> > > > --
> > Bill > > "John McEnery" <bigjo...@optonline.net> wrote in message > > ...
> > Hogwash > > "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message > > ...
> > Mind drugs may hinder recovery > > > > By Robert Whitaker > > USA TODAY > > > > March 4th 2002 > > > > The movie A Beautiful Mind, nominated for eight Academy Awards, > > has > > brought welcome attention to the fact that people can and do > > recover > > from schizophrenia, a severely disabling disorder that affects > > about > > one in 100 Americans. Unfortunately, the film fabricates a > > critical > > detail of John Nash's recovery and in so doing, obscures a > > question > > that should concern us all: Do the medications we use to treat > > schizophrenia promote long-term recovery -- or hinder it?
> > > > In the movie, Nash -- just before he receives a Nobel Prize --
> > speaks > > of taking ''newer medications.'' The National Alliance for the > > Mentally Ill has praised the film's director, Ron Howard, for > > showing > > the ''vital role of medication'' in Nash's recovery. But as Sylvia > > Nasar notes in her biography of Nash, on which the movie is > > loosely > > based, this brilliant mathematician stopped taking anti-psychotic > > drugs in 1970 and slowly recovered over two decades. Nasar > > concluded > > that Nash's refusal to take drugs ''may have been fortunate'' > > because > > their deleterious effects ''would have made his gentle re-entry > > into > > the world of mathematics a near impossibility.'' > > > > His is just one of many such cases. Most Americans are unaware > > that > > the World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly found that > > long-term schizophrenia outcomes are much worse in the USA and > > other > > ''developed'' countries than in poor ones such as India and > > Nigeria, > > where relatively few patients are on anti-psychotic medications.
> > In > > ''undeveloped'' countries, nearly two-thirds of schizophrenia > > patients > > are doing fairly well five years after initial diagnosis; about > > 40% > > have basically recovered. But in the USA and other developed > > countries, most patients become chronically ill. The outcome > > differences are so marked that WHO concluded that living in a > > developed country is a ''strong predictor'' that a patient never > > will > > fully recover.
> > > > Myth of medication > > > > There is more. In 1987, psychologist Courtenay Harding reported > > that a > > third of chronic schizophrenia patients released from Vermont > > State > > Hospital in the late 1950s completely recovered. Everyone in this > > ''best-outcomes'' group shared one common factor: All had weaned > > themselves from anti-psychotic medications. The notion that > > schizophrenics must spend a lifetime on these drugs, she > > concluded, is > > a ''myth.'' > > > > In 1994, Harvard Medical School researchers found that outcomes > > for > > U.S. schizophrenia patients had worsened during the past 20 years > > and > > were now no better than they were 100 years earlier, when therapy > > involved plunking patients into bathtubs for hours. And in 1998, > > University of Pennsylvania investigators reported that standard > > anti-psychotic medications cause a specific area of the brain to > > become abnormally enlarged and that this drug-induced enlargement > > is > > ***ociated with a worsening of symptoms.
> > > > Comprehensive care succeeds > > > > All of this has led a few European physicians to explore non-drug > > alternatives. In Finland, doctors treat newly diagnosed > > schizophrenia > > patients with comprehensive care: counseling, social-support > > services > > and the selective use of anti-psychotic medications. Some patients > > do > > better on low doses of medication, and some without it. And they > > report great results: A majority of patients remain free of > > psychotic > > symptoms for extended periods and hold down jobs.
> > > > John Nash's recovery from schizophrenia is a moving story. But we > > are > > not well served when the movie fibs about the anti-psychotic > > drugs' > > role in his recovery. If anything, his story should inspire us to > > reconsider anti-psychotics' long-term efficacy with an honest, > > open > > mind. That would be a first step toward reforming our care -- and > > if > > there is one thing we can conclude from the WHO studies, it is > > that > > reform is vitally needed. Perhaps then we could even hope that > > schizophrenia outcomes in this country would improve to the point > > that > > they were equal to those in poor countries such as India and > > Nigeria.
> > > > --
> > Robert Whitaker is the author of Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad > > Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill.
> > > > --
"Bill Hewitt" hewit...@hotmail.com
What source do you have that would tend to do so, John?
--
Bill "John McEnery" <bigjo...@optonline.net> wrote in message ...
None of those sources inspire much confidence in one seeking the truth "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message ...
Exactly. Children as young as 3 are being pushed 'kiddie cocaine' Ritalin. Not only is it tragic but it is 100% fraudulent. ADHD is not a neurological disorder! There is no scientific evidence or valid method of testing that proves that ADHD, as a mental 'disease', actually exists.
http://www.drugawareness.org http://www.adhdfraud.org http://www.fightforkids.org http://www.ritalindeath.com/ Mike "Bill Hewitt" <hewit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message <>...
> Of course they may, and many times do. P***ing out Ridilin like it's candy > is one example.
> > --
> Bill > > "Theta" <th...@btinternet.com> wrote in message > ...
> > Mind drugs may hinder recovery > > > > By Robert Whitaker > > USA TODAY > > > > March 4th 2002 > > > > The movie A Beautiful Mind, nominated for eight Academy Awards, has > > brought welcome attention to the fact that people can and do recover > > from schizophrenia, a severely disabling disorder that affects about > > one in 100 Americans. Unfortunately, the film fabricates a critical > > detail of John Nash's recovery and in so doing, obscures a question > > that should concern us all: Do the medications we use to treat > > schizophrenia promote long-term recovery -- or hinder it?
> > > > In the movie, Nash -- just before he receives a Nobel Prize -- speaks > > of taking ''newer medications.'' The National Alliance for the > > Mentally Ill has praised the film's director, Ron Howard, for showing > > the ''vital role of medication'' in Nash's recovery. But as Sylvia > > Nasar notes in her biography of Nash, on which the movie is loosely > > based, this brilliant mathematician stopped taking anti-psychotic > > drugs in 1970 and slowly recovered over two decades. Nasar concluded > > that Nash's refusal to take drugs ''may have been fortunate'' because > > their deleterious effects ''would have made his gentle re-entry into > > the world of mathematics a near impossibility.'' > > > > His is just one of many such cases. Most Americans are unaware that > > the World Health Organization (WHO) has repeatedly found that > > long-term schizophrenia outcomes are much worse in the USA and other > > ''developed'' countries than in poor ones such as India and Nigeria, > > where relatively few patients are on anti-psychotic medications. In > > ''undeveloped'' countries, nearly two-thirds of schizophrenia patients > > are doing fairly well five years after initial diagnosis; about 40% > > have basically recovered. But in the USA and other developed > > countries, most patients become chronically ill. The outcome > > differences are so marked that WHO concluded that living in a > > developed country is a ''strong predictor'' that a patient never will > > fully recover.
> > > > Myth of medication > > > > There is more. In 1987, psychologist Courtenay Harding reported that a > > third of chronic schizophrenia patients released from Vermont State > > Hospital in the late 1950s completely recovered. Everyone in this > > ''best-outcomes'' group shared one common factor: All had weaned > > themselves from anti-psychotic medications. The notion that > > schizophrenics must spend a lifetime on these drugs, she concluded, is > > a ''myth.'' > > > > In 1994, Harvard Medical School researchers found that outcomes for > > U.S. schizophrenia patients had worsened during the past 20 years and > > were now no better than they were 100 years earlier, when therapy > > involved plunking patients into bathtubs for hours. And in 1998, > > University of Pennsylvania investigators reported that standard > > anti-psychotic medications cause a specific area of the brain to > > become abnormally enlarged and that this drug-induced enlargement is > > ***ociated with a worsening of symptoms.
> > > > Comprehensive care succeeds > > > > All of this has led a few European physicians to explore non-drug > > alternatives. In Finland, doctors treat newly diagnosed schizophrenia > > patients with comprehensive care: counseling, social-support services > > and the selective use of anti-psychotic medications. Some patients do > > better on low doses of medication, and some without it. And they > > report great results: A majority of patients remain free of psychotic > > symptoms for extended periods and hold down jobs.
> > > > John Nash's recovery from schizophrenia is a moving story. But we are > > not well served when the movie fibs about the anti-psychotic drugs' > > role in his recovery. If anything, his story should inspire us to > > reconsider anti-psychotics' long-term efficacy with an honest, open > > mind. That would be a first step toward reforming our care -- and if > > there is one thing we can conclude from the WHO studies, it is that > > reform is vitally needed. Perhaps then we could even hope that > > schizophrenia outcomes in this country would improve to the point that > > they were equal to those in poor countries such as India and Nigeria.
> > > > --
> > Robert Whitaker is the author of Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad > > Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill.
| To Top |