Look at these photos. The guys at the top were scientists.
These guys are not scientists. They are psychiatrists
Russell Barkley says he is a Scientist. You name me what scientific breakthrough he’s ever discovered. Alexander Fleming discovered penicillin in 1928. Einstein the Theory of Relativity in 1905. Newton the theory of gravity. What has Barkley ever done or contributed in his life apart from take thousands of dollars of Big Pharma money every year, push very dangerous drugs on You Tube and in books such as Ritalin and Adderall, exaggerate their benefits, minimize their hazards, expound his theories on an extremely dubious disorder called ADHD, which according to the DSM and online tests which claim to be scientific, I’ve got, and practically everybody I know has got. Of which the criteria has been widened twice and people are getting diagnosed in 15 minutes and six questions, and push another dubious disorder called Sluggish Congitive Tempo which for me should be called Boring Teacher Syndrome.
If Barkley was a real or true scientist, he’d be making discoveries, not proposing his opinions, or theories, which in effect that is what they are. There is no blood test, no absolute brain scan to confirm ADHD, it is a wishy washy tick list of subjective views where one person can say you have got it one day and another not the day after. And that applies to ODD or Depression or Borderline Personality Disorder.
Russell Barkley is no scientist. He’s a psychiatrist.
Water is wet. Fire is hot. Newton discovered the law of gravity. Einstein discovered the theory of relativity. That is science.
ADHD, ODD, Childhood Bipolar and Sluggish Cognitive Tempo, Depression or Psychiatry are not Science.
Barkley’s made a good and well paid living out of promoting “ADHD” from books and speaking tours and being a Professor. And as for psychiatry being scientific, what is scientific about 27 people, most of whom have links with drug companies, deciding to vote in and vote out what is a disorder or not? Most of the DSM is laughable. Where’s the science behind that?
Psychiatry is not an exact Science. I could, if I wanted to, go in almost any Psychiatrist’s office and fake ADHD, and get diagnosed, and if I wanted to, go on a college campus and sell Adderall to students, or to truck drivers, or use myself, but I don’t want to because it is crap and dangerous crap at that.
I could also, if I wished, fake a diagnosis of Schizophrenia, by saying I am hearing voices or I have wrote all Elvis Presley’s songs or I designed the Golden Gate Bridge and Cameras are spying on me. I could also fake Depression. OCD. Or most other mental illness and disorders, and get hold of drugs to sell or use.
This is what Barkley says about stimulant drugs “There is no risk of later substance abuse from having taken stimulants in childhood, and the evidence suggests that if you continue taking medication in adolescence the risk goes down, not up, that staying on your medication as an adolescent lowers the risk for substance abuse.
These are not addictive drugs. To be addictive you would have to crush them and inhale them like cocaine or inject them intravenously, and you would have to do it repeatedly. Stimulants do not create aggressive behavior, they decrease it”.
This contradicts Barkley’s findings. https://medium.com/endless/adderall-got-my-friend-hooked-on-meth-3189175098bb
Providing drugs for mental illness is an industry worth a third of a trillion dollars a year. It’s hardly surprising that new mental diseases come thick and fast.
That’s the science behind psychiatry. Money and marketing.
Did Barkley ever read Nadine Lambert’s findings which totally contradicted his view about people using stimulants in childhood? It often happens that kids use Adderall or Cocaine and then want something else, like Cocaine or Speed or Meth and develop and addiction to that. Barkley says these drugs aren’t addictive. How does he explain rehabs having Adderall or Ritalin users in them. The story of Richard Fee. How does he explain people who have committed shootings being on them. Where’s your science Barkley that is non-pharma backed?
How does Barkley explain Kurt Cobain who was taking Ritalin aged 6 and later went onto abuse Heroin and other drugs, and blew his brains out aged 27? That’s science.
Barkley never once mentioned his brother having ADHD when he was alive. Then, years after his brother’s death, he suddenly started saying he lost his brother to undiagnosed ADHD, and if his brother had been diagnosed and medicated he’d be alive today. He describes his brothers personality. He seems to have been a likable, full of life, interesting guy, if Barkley’s description is correct though apparently he had a drink problem. Why would you want to drug somebody who seemed a free spirit? This isn’t science. It is marketing. Treat the drink problem yes but don’t put dangerous, psychoactive, foreign substances in people’s brains to change who they are. We know very little about the brain and what it does. Ron Barkley probably didn’t want drugs changing who or what he was. And making him somebody he wasn’t.
And we are told ADHD is Scientific.
“Mental illness” is an oxymoron. If odd thoughts and feelings are caused by brain problems that makes them physical illnesses. (Lyme Disease, PANDAS, and Traumatic Brain Injury.) Ask a psychiatrist what the difference is between the problems he treats and those requiring a neurologist. Watch him hem and haw. Or block without responding.
These are the first 10 questions from Ned Hallowell’s book Driven to Distraction. I am reading this garbage and struggling not to laugh. How does crap like this get published? Admittedly Hallowell and John Ratey, co-author, admit it is not a definite diagnosis, but a guide list to “ADHD”.
Are you left handed or ambidextrous?
Yes my wife is. My dad was. Two of my daughters Louise and Zoe are southpaws.
Are you moody?
Do you have a family history of drug abuse alcohol abuse depression or bipolar?
Were you an underachiever at school? Louise IQ was 116 and she was pulled up over it. Andrews was 111 and he was. Mine is 110.
Do you have trouble getting started on things?
Do you zone out or space out a lot? My daughter Louise was pulled up at school for that. So was my son Andrew
Do you fidget tap your feet fidget? Two of my kids again
Do you find it hard to relax?
Are you impatient?
Do you get bored easily? Two of my kids.
Do you have to keep rereading pages in book? Yep
Do you laugh a lot?
Do you love to travel? Yep
Were you the class clown who made kids laugh. Two of my kids were like that
Are you intuitive?
See what I mean? That’s 99% of the population.
Where’s the science when we are told Einstein had ADHD, Autism, or Schizophrenia, or Dyslexia. How do we know? I’ve seen JFK, Churchill, Lincoln, John Lennon, Mozart, described as having ADHD. Where’s the science?
Where’s the science of Hallowell diagnosing a random stranger on TV on the Revolution Show who he knew nothing about or telling us 15% of the population have ADHD when the DSM says 5%?
This was Ned Hallowell in 2012. “The science is clear: used properly stimulant medication is safe, in many ways safer than than aspirin, and provides the most effective short term aid we have to help people of all ages deal with the negative symptoms associated with A.D.H.D”. The science tells you that you don’t get addicted to aspirin. You don’t get growth suppression, high heart rate, high blood pressure, headaches, high body temperature, aggression, violence, mania, delusions, hallucinations, delusions, psychosis, suicide, nervousness, anxiety, dizziness, to aspirin. Students aren’t taking it on college campuses to pass exams or for fun or to make money. Aspirin can be dangerous if abused alright, but it is not as dangerous as Ritalin or Adderall, which are in essence Cocaine or Speed. So where’s the science Ned?
Where’s the science of people with so-called ADHD having bad reactions to Ritalin or Adderall, let alone not having the disorder?
Where’s the science in a disorder going from kids who are genuinely hyperactive, can’t sleep, can’t sit still for two minutes to people losing keys, zoning out in class, talking a lot, fidgeting, being bored? That’s a checklist again.
Psychiatry is science? Why does the DSM refuse to recognize Barkley’s colleague Joe Biederman’s Childhood Bipolar, and no other country outside the US does. The science was seen in the fate of four year old Rebecca Riley.
Chills and fever are symptoms. Malaria and typhoid are diseases. Diseases are proven to exist by objective evidence and physical tests. Yet, no mental diseases have ever been proven to medically exist.
And if disorders are to be exempted from this burden of proof on grounds that they are mental, then why should they be treated physically instead of mentally?
Harvard Medical Schools Joseph Glenmullen, MD, says that in psychiatry, all of its diagnoses are merely syndromes [or disorders], clusters of symptoms presumed to be related, not diseases. There is no blood or other biological test to ascertain the presence or absence of a mental illness, as there is for most bodily diseases. Where’s the science?
One prevailing psychiatric theory (key to psychotropic drug sales) is that mental disorders result from a chemical imbalance in the brain. As with its other theories, there is no biological or other evidence to prove this. Representative of a large group of medical and biochemistry experts, Elliot Valenstein, Ph.D., author of Blaming the Brain says: [T]here are no tests available for assessing the chemical status of a living persons brain.
There is no objective way to measure serotonin levels in the brain, there is no blood test or brain scan. So this idea that depression is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain is not a valid scientific theory, you couldn’t possibly have collected any evidence in favor of it. But the drug companies make billions of dollars selling you people this medication.
The chemical imbalance theory that is applied across the board to mental health “disorders” has never been scientifically proven, and yet we have been bombarded with symptom-focused Direct-to-Consumer pharmaceutical advertising for the past twenty years that tells us “[insert mental disorder here] may be caused by a chemical balance in your brain… [insert Drug here] can help fix that imbalance.” The public has accepted it, and an under-resourced psychiatric profession has helped to propagate it.
So where’s the science?
Professor Trevor Robbins, co-author of the study and Director of the BCNI [Behavioural and Clinical Neuroscience Institute], said: “These findings question the previously accepted view that major abnormalities in dopamine function are the main cause of ADHD…
Where’s the science?
according to widely published psychiatrist Ronald Pies MD, the chemical imbalance theory never existed:
I am not aware of any concerted effort by academic psychiatrists, psychiatric textbooks, or official psychiatric organizations to promote a simplistic chemical imbalance hypothesis of mental illness.
This is clearly untrue, and does not reflect the public opinion created by the psychiatric and medical establishments over the course of several decades. Despite the denial of the likes of Dr. Pies, countless statements have been published in family-oriented magazines – not peer reviewed journals – advising parents of the chemical imbalance theory:
In the last decade, neuroscience and psychiatric research has begun to unlock the brain’s secrets. We now know that mental illnesses – such as depression or schizophrenia … [are] real diseases caused by abnormalities of brain structure and imbalances of chemicals in the brain. Unlocking the Brain’s Secrets, by Richard Harding, MD, then President of the APA, in Family Circle magazine, November 20, 2001, p 62.
“More serious depression, or depression that is quickly getting worse, should be treated with medication. Antidepressants are not “uppers” and they have no effect on normal mood. They restore brain chemistry to normal.” About Depression in Women, by Nada L. Stotland, MD, Professor, Departments of Psychiatry and Obstetrics/Gynecology, Rush Medical College Chicago, and subsequently President of the APA. Op.Cit., p 65.
“ADHD often runs in families. Parents of ADHD youth often have ADHD themselves. The disorder is related to an inadequate supply of chemical messengers of the nerve cells in specific regions of the brain related to attention, activity, inhibitions, and mental operations.” Paying Attention to ADHD, by Timothy Wilens, MD, Associate Professor of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, and Psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital. Op. Cit., p 65
Where’s the science?
William Dodson says 10% of adult have ADHD. There’s never been any credible study held anywhere in the world to state that fact. Where’s the science?
With psychiatry guidelines are ambiguous or open to interpretation. A patients history and set of symptoms could lead to different diagnosis. Don’t all kids regarding ADHD fidget, not listen when spoken to or avoid boring tasks. The DSM doesn’t take family dynamics into account. Where’s the science?
There’s no science behind Russell Barkley’s theories, anything involved with psychiatry or what psychiatrists say themselves.
And that is science.