Bush plans to screen whole US population for mental illness

[Guest guest]

Sorry to cross the political line folks, but President Bush just crossed it himself by fucking with my Human Rights to be responsible for my own mental health.

 

Please note that it's not just the Republicans who've sold out here. The Democrats have been bought out too, as you'll notice when you see that Eli Lily et al have been contributing to both political parties, albeit the lion's share has gone to the Republicans.

 

Valorie and I will be supporting the Libertarians this coming election if only as a protest. (I've always considered myself apolitical and a "Responsible Anarchist")

 

We're losing it folks. This country is going down the tubes if we don't do something about this, and do it quick. Even though it is against list policies to discuss politics on HR, for the nonce, I am opening up this thread and allowing it to continue while reserving the right to shut it down at any time if discussions can not be kept sane.

 

The following article is enough to make me sick. If you love your country; if you love your freedom; if you love your sanity and your human rights; you'll fight this with everything you have. I am. Both the Republicans and the Democrats have betrayed us, and we need to take our country back.

 

In sadness and in anger,

 

Doc

 

Ian "Doc" Shillington N.D.727-738-0554DocShillington

BMJ 2004;328:1458 (19 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1458 Bush plans to screen whole US population for mental illness Jeanne Lenzer http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/328/7454/1458New York A sweeping mental health initiative will be unveiled by President George WBush in July. The plan promises to integrate mentally ill patients fullyinto the community by providing "services in the community, rather thaninstitutions," according to a March 2004 progress report entitled NewFreedom Initiative (www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/newfreedom/toc-2004.html).While some praise the plan's goals, others say it protects the profits ofdrug companies at the expense of the public. Bush established the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health in April 2002to conduct a "comprehensive study of the United States mental health servicedelivery system." The commission issued its recommendations in July 2003.Bush instructed more than 25 federal agencies to develop an implementationplan based on those recommendations. The president's commission found that "despite their prevalence, mentaldisorders often go undiagnosed" and recommended comprehensive mental healthscreening for "consumers of all ages," including preschool children.According to the commission, "Each year, young children are expelled frompreschools and childcare facilities for severely disruptive behaviours andemotional disorders." Schools, wrote the commission, are in a "key position"to screen the 52 million students and 6 million adults who work at theschools. The commission also recommended "Linkage [of screening] with treatment andsupports" including "state-of-the-art treatments" using "specificmedications for specific conditions." The commission commended the TexasMedication Algorithm Project (TMAP) as a "model" medication treatment planthat "illustrates an evidence-based practice that results in better consumeroutcomes." Dr Darrel Regier, director of research at the American PsychiatricAssociation (APA), lauded the president's initiative and the Texas projectmodel saying, "What's nice about TMAP is that this is a logical plan basedon efficacy data from clinical trials." He said the association has called for increased funding for implementationof the overall plan. But the Texas project, which promotes the use of newer, more expensiveantidepressants and antipsychotic drugs, sparked off controversy when AllenJones, an employee of the Pennsylvania Office of the Inspector General,revealed that key officials with influence over the medication plan in hisstate received money and perks from drug companies with a stake in themedication algorithm (15 May, p1153). He was sacked this week for speakingto the BMJ and the New York Times. The Texas project started in 1995 as an alliance of individuals from thepharmaceutical industry, the University of Texas, and the mental health andcorrections systems of Texas. The project was funded by a Robert WoodJohnson grant—and by several drug companies. Mr Jones told the BMJ that the same "political/pharmaceutical alliance" thatgenerated the Texas project was behind the recommendations of the NewFreedom Commission, which, according to his whistleblower report, were"poised to consolidate the TMAP effort into a comprehensive national policyto treat mental illness with expensive, patented medications of questionablebenefit and deadly side effects, and to force private insurers to pick upmore of the tab" (http://psychrights.org/Drugs/AllenJonesTMAPJanuary20.pdf).Larry D Sasich, research associate with Public Citizen in Washington, DC,told the BMJ that studies in both the United States and Great Britainsuggest that "using the older drugs first makes sense. There's nothing inthe labeling of the newer atypical antipsychotic drugs that suggests theyare superior in efficacy to haloperidol [an older "typical" antipsychotic].There has to be an enormous amount of unnecessary expenditures for the newerdrugs." Drug companies have contributed three times more to the campaign of GeorgeBush, seen here campaigning in Florida, than to that of his rival John KerryOlanzapine (trade name Zyprexa), one of the atypical antipsychotic drugsrecommended as a first line drug in the Texas algorithm, grossed $4.28bn(£2.35bn; 3.56bn) worldwide in 2003 and is Eli Lilly's top selling drug. A2003 New York Times article by Gardiner Harris reported that 70% ofolanzapine sales are paid for by government agencies, such as Medicare andMedicaid. Eli Lilly, manufacturer of olanzapine, has multiple ties to the Bushadministration. George Bush Sr was a member of Lilly's board of directorsand Bush Jr appointed Lilly's chief executive officer, Sidney Taurel, to aseat on the Homeland Security Council. Lilly made $1.6m in politicalcontributions in 2000—82% of which went to Bush and the Republican Party. Jones points out that the companies that helped to start up the Texasproject have been, and still are, big contributors to the election funds ofGeorge W Bush. In addition, some members of the New Freedom Commission haveserved on advisory boards for these same companies, while others have directties to the Texas Medication Algorithm Project. Bush was the governor of Texas during the development of the Texas project,and, during his 2000 presidential campaign, he boasted of his support forthe project and the fact that the legislation he passed expanded Medicaidcoverage of psychotropic drugs. Bush is the clear front runner when it comes to drug company contributions.According to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), manufacturers ofdrugs and health products have contributed $764 274 to the 2004 Bushcampaign through their political action committees and employees—faroutstripping the $149 400 given to his chief rival, John Kerry, by 26 April.Drug companies have fared exceedingly well under the Bush administration,according to the centre's spokesperson, Steven Weiss. The commission's recommendation for increased screening has also beenquestioned. Robert Whitaker, journalist and author of Mad in America, saysthat while increased screening "may seem defensible," it could also be seenas "fishing for customers," and that exorbitant spending on new drugs "robsfrom other forms of care such as job training and shelter programmes." But Dr Graham Emslie, who helped develop the Texas project, defendsscreening: "There are good data showing that if you identify kids at anearlier age who are aggressive, you can intervene... and change theirtrajectory."