BIGGEST BULLSHITTER IN AMERICA?

Biggest bullshitter in America? Who is Dr. Allen Frances?

by Jon Rappoport

June 30, 2011

www.nomorefakenews.com

Hey, the man may be a saint. Who knows? He might be so far beyond my ability to comprehend him I can’t hope to grasp the meaning of his work. He might deserve a Nobel Prize and the thanks of a grateful nation and a statue in the Smithsonian. But…

Is it possible this doctor is the biggest bullshitter in America? I’m just asking, because I’ve been thinking about running a contest. Also because I’ve been reading the interesting statements he made to Gary Greenberg, author of a Wired article: “Inside the Battle to Define Mental Illness.” (Dec.27, 2010).

How that article failed to make it out into the mainstream and grab big headlines is beyond me. Well, not really, given its incendiary implications. Editors and reporters at major media outlets have an uncommon nose for avoiding the sort of trouble Greenberg’s piece would have created, were it to be unleashed on the population—and although they like to call themselves journalists, that’s a myth even they don’t really believe anymore. They’re mutts on short leashes.

Dr. Allen Frances (twitter) is the man who, in 1994, headed up the project to write the latest edition of the psychiatric bible, the DSM-IV. This tome defines and labels and describes every official mental disorder in the known universe. The DSM-IV eventually listed 297 of them.

In an April 19, 1994, New York Times piece, “Scientist At Work,” Daniel Goleman called Frances “Perhaps the most powerful psychiatrist in America at the moment…”

Well, sure. If you’re sculpting the entire canon of diagnosable mental disorders for your colleagues, for insurers, for the government, for pharma (who will sell the drugs matched up to the 297 DSM-IV diagnoses), you’re right up there in the pantheon.

But 12 years later, long after the DSM-IV had been put into print, Frances talked to Wired’s Greenberg and said the following:

There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.”

That’s on the order of the designer of the Hindenburg, looking at the burned rubble on the ground, remarking, “Well, I knew there would be a problem.”

That’s much more serious than the president telling the American people, “We sent our combat planes to Libya, but I meant to say Liberia.”

After a suitable pause, Dr. Frances remarked to Greenberg, “These concepts [of distinct mental disorders] are virtually impossible to define precisely with bright lines at the borders.”

Obliquely, Frances might have been referring to the fact that his baby, the DSM-IV, had rearranged earlier definitions of ADHD and bipolar to permit many more diagnoses, leading to a vast acceleration of drug-dosing with highly powerful and toxic compounds.

Finally, at the end of the Wired interview, Frances went off on a quite intriguing foray, praising what amounts to a mass-population placebo effect which would justify the existence of the entire psychiatric profession.

Diagnosis [as spelled out in the DSM-IV] is part of the magic…you know those medieval maps? In the places where they didn’t know what was going on, they wrote ‘Dragons live here’…we have a dragon’s world here. But you wouldn’t want to be without the map.”

Here is the import of Dr. Frances’ words: People need to hope for the healing of their troubles; so even if we’re shooting blanks and pretending to know one kind of mental disorder from another, even if we’re inventing these mental-disorder definitions based on no biological or chemical diagnostic tests—since the tests don’t exist and we’re just juggling lists of behaviors—it’s a good thing, because people will then believe there is hope for them; they’ll believe it because we place a name on their problems…

If I were an editor at one of the big national newspapers, and one my reporters walked in and told me, “The most powerful psychiatrist in America just said the DSM is bullshit but it’s still important,” I think I’d make room on the front page.

If the reporter then added, “This shrink was in charge of creating the DSM-IV,” I’d clear more room above the fold.

If the reporter went on to explain that the whole profession of psychiatry would collapse overnight without the DSM, I’d call for a special section of the paper to be printed.

I’d tell the reporter to get ready to pound on this story day after day for months. I’d tell him to track down all the implications of Dr. Frances’ statements.

I’d open a bottle of champagne the toast the soon-to-be-soaring sales of my newspaper.

And then, of course, the next day I’d be fired.

Because there are powerful multi-billion-dollar interests at stake, and who in his right mind would challenge them?

And as I walked out of my job, I’d see a bevy of blank-eyed pharmaceutical executives marching into the office of the paper’s publisher, ready to read the riot act to him.

But oh well; would I have a candidate for biggest bullshitter in America? Just asking.

And as I chewed my cud and wandered the avenues of the big city, I’d look at all the people and something would seep in: the difference between the delusion called reality, which all these people accept, and the actual state of affairs: the giant con game, the giant shell game that allows the drugs to be sold, the drugs that—each and every one—deliver what the shrinks politely call “adverse effects.”

Look them up sometime, if you have a strong stomach.

Here is a sampling:

Adverse effects of Valproate (given for a bipolar diagnosis) include:

acute, life-threatening, and even fatal liver toxicity;

life-threatening inflammation of the pancreas;

brain damage.

Adverse effects of Lithium (also given for a bipolar diagnosis) include:

intercranial pressure leading to blindness;

peripheral circulatory collapse;

stupor and coma.

Adverse effects of Risperdal (given for “bipolar” and “irritability stemming from autism”) include:

serious impairment of cognitive function;

fainting;

restless muscles in neck or face, tremors (may be indicative of motor brain damage).

In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published a most important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was called “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)” [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].

Scarnati listed a large number of adverse affects of Ritalin and cited published journal articles which reported each of these symptoms.

For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:

Paranoid delusions
Paranoid psychosis
Hypomanic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis
Activation of psychotic symptoms
Toxic psychosis
Visual hallucinations
Auditory hallucinations
Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences
Effects pathological thought processes
Extreme withdrawal
Terrified affect
Started screaming
Aggressiveness
Insomnia
Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphetamine-like effects
Psychic dependence
High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug
Decreased REM sleep
When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia
Convulsions
Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.

A recent survey revealed that a high percentage of children diagnosed with bipolar had first received a diagnosis of ADHD. This is informative, because Ritalin and other speed-type drugs are given to kids who are slapped with the ADHD label. Speed, sooner or later, produces a crash. This is easy to call “clinical depression.” Then comes Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft. These drugs can produce temporary highs, followed by more crashes. The psychiatrist notices this up and down pattern—and then comes the diagnosis of bipolar (manic-depression) and new drugs, including Valproate and Lithium.

In the US alone, there are at least 300,000 cases of motor brain damage incurred by people who have been prescribed so-called anti-psychotic drugs (aka “major tranquilizers”). Risperdal is one of the major tranquilizers. (source: Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Peter Breggin)

This psychiatric drug plague is accelerating across the land.

Where are the mainstream reporters and editors and newspapers and TV anchors who should be breaking this story and mercilessly hammering on it week after week? They are in harness.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

REVISED PSYCHIATRIC DISORDERS

 

REVISED PSYCHIATRIC DISORDERS

A No More Fake News Special

by Jon Rappoport

JUNE 29, 2011

 

It’s now an open secret that there are no diagnostic tests for any of the so-called mental disorders psychiatry claims exist.

 

While people have problems, their categorization, definition, and diagnosis by the official experts are done by assembling the opinions of committees. This is a farce.

 

In the interests of fairness, it’s time someone outside the field of psychiatry made a contribution to the terminology.

 

So here are several new disorders I believe should be listed in the DSM-5, the directory and bible of the profession.

 

LABELING DISORDER (LD)

LD is characterized by an unhealthy and pervasive obsession to label human behavior. The sufferer sees illness lurking behind every lamppost.

There are six distinct classes of LD–

LPP (Labeling for Profit and Prestige)

LC (Labeling for Control)

LPAS (Labeling as a Pretense to Actual Science)

LFSB (Labeling From Sheer Boredom)

LCWDC (Labeling to Cooperate With Drug Companies)

LDIP (Labeling Done to Injure People [See Sadism])

 

INFERIORITY COMPLEX COMPENSATION THROUGH PROFESSIONAL ARROGANCE

DISORDER (ICCPAD)

ICCPAD symptoms include: speaking down through the nose, as if from a great height; attempting to intimidate parents of small children; and the track-lighting of wall-hanging diplomas and certificates.

 

ATTRIBUTION OF NEW PATIENT SYMPTOMS TO PREVIOUSLY DIAGNOSED DISORDER

SYNDROME (ANPSPDDS)

ANPSDDS specifically refers to the patient’s symptoms actually caused by injurious drugs the psychiatrist has prescribed. Intentionally, or through sheer incompetence, the psychiatrist denies the adverse effects of the drugs, and instead claims the patient’s new symptoms reveal his disorder is worsening, or he/she has suddenly acquired a new disorder.

 

The treatment regimen for all three of these new mental disorders is the same: stripping of licenses to practice any form of medicine; issuance of a restraining order barring the psychiatrist from coming within 500 yards of a former patient; one year of community service, served pumping gas at a local station, preferably one which forbids employing attendants.

 

The final step of treatment consists of the psychiatrist ingesting half a dozen of the most powerful drugs he prescribed for patients during his career.

 

Thus, the playing field is leveled.

 

JON RAPPOPORT

An investigative reporter for 30 years, Jon is the author of an 18-lesson course, LOGIC AND ANALYSIS. To learn more about the course, click here.

Jon is the associate producer on a film in progress, American Addict, detailing the effects of pharmaceuticals on the US population.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

PENETRATING LANGUAGES

 

PENETRATING LANGUAGES

 

My drawings inspire and are not to be defined. They determine nothing. They place us, as does music, in the ambiguous world of the indeterminate. They are a kind of metaphor.”

Odilon Redon

 

JUNE 29, 2011. In other articles, I’ve mentioned the potential of new invented languages that don’t adhere to the familiar patterns of subject-object-verb.

 

For example, languages in which nouns display action characteristics as their prime feature, without the use of adjectives.

 

Let’s look at the language of psychiatry. It is reductionist. It takes a wide spread of behaviors and encapsulates them under “disorder” labels. “Clinical depression,” “ADHD,” “bipolar,” “oppositional defiance disorder.”

 

These labels are fictions. Well, why not? A language can be composed entirely of fictions. It’s an interesting idea. However, when these labels are used to make diagnoses that then lead to the administration of highly toxic drugs, that’s another story altogether.

 

And when the fictitious labels are sold as expert truth, this is also troubling.

 

But here I want to comment on the reductionist strategy itself. It is very old, and it has always served the same purpose: making complexity simple for simple minds.

 

People feel relieved to learn that their child’s unpredictable behaviors can be called ADHD. A label to hold on to in a storm. An anchor.

 

No further investigation is necessary. ADHD comes in and saves the day and answers the question Why.

 

Just as naming a messiah and indicating how he will bring salvation to the yearning masses is a welcome reduction of experience.

 

You can always sell reduction. Selling proliferation isn’t as easy.

 

Here is a VERY interesting example. “The group,” which one would think is more complex than “the individual,” is depicted as the fundamental unit of social and political concern. It is made into a simpler device, by assuming that we all share identical problems and impulses. Through this assumption, there is no longer any need to consider the individual in isolation, because he is merely a copy of the next individual, who in turn is a copy of the next individual, and so on. Reduction.

 

An empty slogan or generality is another strategy that allows simplification. For instance, Hope and Change. A moment’s calm reflection tells you you have no clue what is actually intended. However, you are invited to plug in your own hopes and your own preferred changes—and when millions of other people do the same thing, the slogan itself operates as a reduction…because in three words, it seems to summarize what everybody wants.

 

Sometimes, what looks like proliferation is actually reduction. Take the case of the DSM, which is the bible of the psychiatric profession. It lists all the fictional mental disorders which have been cooked up by professional committees. At present, there are 297. The number expands with each new edition of the DSM.

 

But the overriding message is this: “We are the experts. We can define what is wrong with the mind of any person. You can’t understand what we’re doing, because you aren’t a professional. So let us take over. We’ll simplify your questions and concerns and treat these disorders.”

 

In the same fashion, the mind-numbing canons and edicts, and the linguistic somersaults that define the cosmology of the Roman Church, conspire to present a clear message: “Let your priest be the judge. He will apply whatever piece of eternal truth is necessary to lead you into a better reality. He’ll boil it down for you.”

 

Reduction.

 

When we get into the area of imagination, we are really being taken for a ride, if we think this faculty is simple and straightforward. Nothing could be further from the truth. However, if people have dumbed themselves down to the point where they believe everything important should be reduced to a concentrate (add water and drink), they are barred from entrance. They are applying exactly the wrong standard to penetrate what, to them, has become a mystery.

 

You might consider this question: in order to serve the repressed need for complexity and variety, what strategy has become most popular in modern society?

 

The answer is: drugs.

 

Interesting, though, that after a certain threshold of continued use is crossed, the person finds himself in a gray area where his mind has been REDUCED.

 

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE STRANGE MACHINE

 

THE STRANGE MACHINE

 

JUNE 28, 2011. Let us suppose we are standing at a table, and on the table is a machine. We have experts with us.

 

They turn on the machine, and they turn it off. They take it apart and examine and examine the pieces, and they put it back together again.

 

They say, “This machine is constructed in a very fine and complex way. We can see that. All the parts are coordinated and their functions interlock. The machine works. There is no doubt of that. But we have no idea what it produces.”

 

And as hard as they try, they come back to the same conclusion. They know it’s a machine. It works. It works very well. But they haven’t a clue about what it turns out, what it accomplishes.

 

So they turn on the machine and they leave the room.

 

The machine runs, without any interference, for ten years.

 

It’s obviously producing something, but no one knows what that is.

 

The output of the machine is invisible.

 

And suppose at some point ten years, 20 years down the line, it becomes apparent that the machine is changing reality. It is introducing new realities.

 

These new realities aren’t visible, but they are felt very strongly.

 

And one of the experts comes back to the room and looks at the machine and says, “I don’t know what you’re doing, but keep doing it, because you’re proving that reality can change at the most fundamental and profound level.”

 

The expert wasn’t sure such a change was possible. He believed something basic about reality was absolutely permanent. He was unhappy with that conclusion—but he had long ago accepted it. Now, though, he feels a rising hope. He was wrong.

 

He realizes that reality was indeed a series of boundaries. However it had been generated originally, that’s what it was.

 

And now it is disintegrating.

 

He feels great joy and anticipation.

 

Why should the former (and now evaporating) reality be permitted to last forever? Why were people disposed to accept that? What made them satisfied with that?

 

Finally, he feels his own hard dedication to the former reality slip away. No reason to maintain it.

 

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

A LEAP OF MAGIC

 

A LEAP OF MAGIC

 

JUNE 28, 2011. When I gave my first two audio seminars on magic, (MIND CONTROL, MIND FREEDOM, and THE TRANSFORMATIONS), I realized I was describing exercises which, if done consistently, could allow people to experience the space-time continuum from a new perspective.

 

It was no longer necessary to think or assume the continuum was a given. It wasn’t necessary to surrender passively to the idea of an all-encompassing continuum.

 

The continuum is a kind of fantasy. A myth. It tells people who think they’re living inside a giant tin can what the shell is made of.

 

Subconsciously, people assume the continuum is WHATEVER THEY USE TO DEFINE THEIR FIELD OF OPERATIONS.

 

For example, suppose a person has an overriding problem he is constantly wrestling with. Every day, every week, he nudges and massages and moves that problem around. He pats it and kicks it and tries to push it and he seeks to move it out of the way. He denies it and accepts it and contemplates it and forgets it and remembers it and feels it…

 

Well, that problem is defining his field of operation…and subconsciously he thinks of it as the continuum.

 

To get outside that conception, the person needs to experience a new kind of action. A new kind of exercise, for example.

 

Here is another analogy. A runner runs around a track, day after day. He runs that quarter-mile and he does wind-sprints on it and slower intervals. He operates there on that track, that oval. And ultimately, he is trying to shorten the amount of time it takes to go around the track once.

 

TIME is his continuum. More specifically, the best time he’s ever registered in a race is his continuum, his boundary—and he wants to break through it.

 

But he keeps doing the same exercises over and over to achieve that breakthrough, and he reaches a limit where he thinks he’s hemmed in. He can’t go any faster.

 

He needs an exercise that will fundamentally alter his relationship to the continuum, to that idea of the “best time” he can muster.

 

In a way, life is like that. People do their best to get ahead—whatever that means to them. They do it from the point of view that they are in a space operating according to certain rules and restrictions.

 

They need two things. One, a new point of view. And two, exercises they do FROM that point of view.

 

So as I was giving those two seminars, I realized this was what I was providing. I had never seen it quite that way before.

 

The painter, Odilon Redon, once wrote, “Artists who approach perfection do not have many ideas.”

 

Translating that statement into my terms, it means: if you are operating within the continuum of your central myth, you will eventually reach a point where you are doing the best you can. You’re approaching perfection along that vector. But it’s not nearly enough…

 

Physics itself will reach this place of blockage, as long as it keeps looking at the same space-time continuum in the same old way. Atoms, electrons, quarks, waves, quantum entanglement, relativity—they will all have to go the way of an extinct species.

 

How we conceive of our own energy is a major piece of the puzzle. We tend to fall into habits, some of them barely noticeable. For instance, we view our energy as circulating within us or around us or coming in toward us.

 

What would happen if we shifted these notions of energy—and we had exercises to back up this shift and make it real and powerful?

 

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TOP PSYCHIATRIST TRASHES HIS OWN WORK

 

TOP PSYCHIATRIST TRASHES HIS WORK

 

by Jon Rappoport

 

Headlines you won’t see:

 

All psychiatric drugs banned; too toxic.

 

Psychiatric profession judged unstable, unscientific.

 

Foundation of psychiatry discovered to be a fantasy.

 

JUNE 28, 2011. I recently learned about a teen whose life was turned inside out and ripped from him. A psychiatrist had diagnosed him at a young age with ADHD, given him Ritalin…and then the parade of newer diagnoses followed—Clinical Depression, Bipolar, Oppositional Defiance Disorder—and the boy ended up on Valproate and Risperdal, two powerful toxic drugs that dropped him over the cliff into psychosis.

 

Does this seem impossible?

 

What lies behind the story, one that is happening with increased frequency all over the world—every day.

 

Psychiatrists are are carte blanche members of an elite club with “diplomatic passports” of the medical variety. Protected by governments and the press. Protected by colleagues. Protected by the public, yes, who blithely accept psychiatric diagnoses as rigorous science.

 

So let us start here. There is a book called the DSM, and it is the bible of the profession. DSM stands for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. In it are listed all the names and descriptions of these disorders. The latest edition, the DSM-4, offers no less than 297 separate psychiatric conditions.

 

How are the disorders discovered? Well, “discovered” is not the correct word. COMMITTEES of professionals hash over ideas and definitions and reports, and they issue the verdicts. They name the disorders. They describe them.

 

It’s all committee work. NO disorder finds its way into the DSM through a clear-cut organic biological or chemical test. Those tests DO NOT EXIST. The tests do not exist for ANY so-called mental disorder or disease.

 

Is this possible? Conceivable?

 

The latest edition of the DSM, the DSM-4, was led by Dr. Allen Frances. In a January 2011 article in Wired, by Gary Greenberg, Dr. Frances is quoted as saying, astonishingly:

 

There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.”

 

This is on the level of stating, “You know, we were quite sure bloodletting was a wonderful way way of treating all illness, and we had all sorts of reasons for recommending the procedure, but then after we sent out the report by horseback and mule all over the land, we met again for an informal chat and realized the entire notion of draining blood from the patient was completely insane.”

 

But Dr. Frances is not the only psychiatrist to point out the emperor has no clothes.

 

The late Dr. Loren Mosher, psychiatrist, former chief of the Center for Studies of Schizophrenia at the National Institute of Mental Health, in his resignation letter sent to the American Psychiatric Association(APA), wrote:

 

Finally, why must the APA pretend to know more than it does? DSM-4 is the fabrication upon which psychiatry seeks acceptance by [the profession of] medicine in general. Insiders know it is more a political than a scientific document.”

 

Thomas Szaz, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry, State University of New York, states:

 

The designation ‘disease’ can only be justified when the cause can be related to demonstrable anatomical lesion, infection or some other physiological defect. As there is no such evidence for any mental disorder, the term disease is a misnomer; in fact, it is fraudulent.”

 

Dr. Peter Breggin, psychiatrist, author of “Toxic Psychiatry,” former staff member at the National Institute of Mental Health and faculty at Johns Hopkins University, writes:

 

No causal relationship has ever been established between a specific biochemical state of the brain and any specific behavior, and it is simplistic to think it is possible.”

 

Yes, people of all ages and backgrounds have problems. But recognizing that is a far cry from codifying these difficulties under titles and including them in a professional guidebook—and claiming they are actual disorders demanding powerful medication.

 

However, DSM-4 is out there and it is the Bible. Therefore, for example, its new and improved (and looser) definitions of ADHD, autism, and bipolar disease have allowed for many more diagnoses—and THAT means more widespread use of highly powerful and toxic drugs. Risperdal, Valproate, and yes, even Ritalin, a cheap form of speed.

 

And the DSM-5 is on the way. It’s due out in May of 2013. So far, the panels of deliberating committees have come up with three new suggestions for disorders:

 

PSYCHOSIS RISK SYNDROME (PRS). Apparently, this is a “pre” diagnosis, an early-warning signal from the inner landscape that alerts the psychiatrist to impending disaster. Of course, the very real possibility that the drugs he is already prescribing to the patient are the cause of “PRS” is out of the question—because such an admission would amount to professional suicide.

 

TEMPER DYSFUNCTIONAL DISORDER (TDD): A child blows up now and then. Could this have something to do with the pound of sugar he’s ingesting every day with his his high-speed sports drink? Could he be reacting to the load of artificial colors and dyes in his processed meals? Couldn’t be the kid’s alcoholic father who beats him once a week—certainly not. Or any of a hundred other reasonable causes. A TDD diagnosis simply means he’s very angry, so medicate him to within an inch of his life.

 

In fact, if PRS and TDD are listed in the new DSM-5, untold numbers of new children will be on heavy drugs every day.

 

MINOR NEUROCOGNITIVE DISORDER (MND). This one is for the old folks. Well, probably anyone over 50. Find yourself failing to remember a detail here and there? Can’t find your keys? Boom. You could be at risk for Alzheimer’s. And even though there are no meds that can cure the big A, we’ll give you drugs for MND, and we’ll say this will delay the onset of Alzheimer’s. Although we have no idea whether that’s true. In fact, we have no idea whether you are going to experience senility and dementia at any point in your life. But just to be on the safe side…

 

Adverse effects of Valproate (given for a bipolar diagnosis) include:

 

acute, life-threatening, and even fatal liver toxicity;

 

life-threatening inflammation of the pancreas;

 

brain damage.

 

Adverse effects of Lithium (also given for a bipolar diagnosis) include:

 

intercranial pressure leading to blindness;

 

peripheral circulatory collapse;

 

stupor and coma.

 

Adverse effects of Risperdal (given for “bipolar” and “irritability stemming from autism”) include:

 

serious impairment of cognitive function;

 

fainting;

 

restless muscles in neck or face, tremors (may be indicative of motor brain damage).

 

In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published a most important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was called “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)” [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].

Scarnati listed a large number of adverse affects of Ritalin and cited published journal articles which reported each of these symptoms.

For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:

Paranoid delusions
Paranoid psychosis
Hypomanic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis
Activation of psychotic symptoms
Toxic psychosis
Visual hallucinations
Auditory hallucinations
Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences
Effects pathological thought processes
Extreme withdrawal
Terrified affect
Started screaming
Aggressiveness
Insomnia
Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphetamine-like effects
Psychic dependence
High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug
Decreased REM sleep
When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia
Convulsions
Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.

A recent survey revealed that a high percentage of kids diagnosed with bipolar had first received a diagnosis of ADHD. This is informative, because Ritalin and other speed-type drugs are given to kids who are slapped with the ADHD label. Speed, sooner or later, produces a crash. This is easy to call “clinical depression.” Then comes Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft. These drugs can produce temporary highs, followed by more crashes. The shrink notices this up and down pattern—and then comes the diagnosis of bipolar (manic-depression) and new drugs, including Valproate and Lithium.

 

In case you hadn’t noticed, the profession of psychiatry has recruited numbers of celebs and politicians who are dedicated to “removing the stigma attached to a diagnosis of a mental disorder.” These supporters frankly have no idea what they’re talking about. In love with the idea of appearing to do good, they go on and on about how mental illness is no different from diabetes, and we should all give great amounts of love and support to those who…well, you know the script. Some actual knowledge might help everybody concerned.

 

In the US alone, there are at least 300,000 cases of motor brain damage incurred by people who have been prescribed so-called anti-psychotic drugs (aka “major tranquilizers). Risperdal is one of those drugs. (source: Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Peter Breggin)

 

This psychiatric drug plague is accelerating across the land, and gullible adults and children under their roofs are taking the pills.

 

Where are the mainstream reporters and editors and newspapers and TV anchors who should be breaking this story and mercilessly pounding on it week after week? They are in harness.

 

JON RAPPOPORT

An investigative reporter for 30 years, Jon is the author of an 18-lesson course, LOGIC AND ANALYSIS. To learn more about the course, click here.

Jon is the associate producer on a film in progress, American Addict, detailing the effects of pharmaceuticals on the US population.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

SECRET SOCIETY EXPOSED

 

SECRET SOCIETY EXPOSED

 

YOU MIGHT HAVE ALREADY KNOWN IT—BUT NOT IN THE FORM OF THIS CONVERSATION…

 

JUNE 27, 2011. A reader wrote to ask if my book, THE SECRET BEHIND SECRET SOCIETIES (now available as an e-book at www.nomorefakenews.com), exposes any specific secrets of these groups.

 

Here is one example of a through-the-looking-glass secret—in the form of a conversation between a reporter, Jeremiah Novak, and two Trilateral Commission members, Karl Kaiser and Richard Cooper. The interview took place in 1978. It concerned the issue of who exactly, during President Carter’s administration, was formulating US economic and political policy.

 

The careless and off-handed attitude of Kaiser and Cooper is astonishing. It’s as if they’re saying, “What we’re revealing is already out in the open, it’s too late to do anything about it, why are you so worked up, we’ve already won…”

 

NOVAK: Is it true that a private [Trilateral committee] led by Henry Owen of the US and made up of representatives of the US, UK, West Germany, Japan, France and the EEC is coordinating the economic and political policies of the Trilateral countries [which would include the US]?

 

COOPER: Yes, they have met three times.

 

NOVAK: Yet, in your recent paper you state that this committee should remain informal because to formalize ‘this function might well prove offensive to some of the Trilateral and other countries which do not take part.’ Who are you afraid of?

 

KAISER: Many countries in Europe would resent the dominant role that West Germany plays at these meetings.

 

COOPER: Many people still live in a world of separate nations, and they would resent such coordination [of policy].

 

NOVAK: But this [Trilateral] committee is essential to your whole policy. How can you keep it a secret or fail to try to get popular support [for its decisions on how Trilateral member nations will conduct their economic and political policies]?

 

COOPER: Well, I guess it’s the press’ job to publicize it.

 

NOVAK: Yes, but why doesn’t President Carter come out with it and tell the American people that economic and political power is being coordinated by a [Trilateral] committee made up of Henry Owen and six others?After all, if [US] policy is being made on a multinational level, the people should know.

 

COOPER: President Carter and Secretary of State Vance have constantly alluded to this in their speeches.

 

KAISER: It just hasn’t become an issue.

 

SOURCE: “Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management,” ed. by Holly Sklar, 1980. South End Press, Boston.

 

How you do like them apples?

 

Rarely has so much been stated so succinctly.

 

Many people still live in a world of separate nations…”

 

Of course, although Kaiser and Cooper claimed everything being manipulated by the Trilateral Commission committee was already obvious and clear, it wasn’t.

 

The interview slipped under the mainstream media radar, which is to say, it was ignored and buried. It didn’t become a scandal on the level of, say, Watergate, although its essence was far larger than Watergate.

 

US economic and political policy run by a committee of the Trilateral Commission—the Commission had been been created in 1973 as an “informal discussion group” by David Rockefeller and his sidekick, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who would become Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor.

 

Shortly after Carter won the presidential election, his aide, Hamilton Jordan, said that if after the inauguration, Cy Vance and Brzezinski came on board as secretary of state and national security advisor, “We’ve lost. And I’ll quit.” Lost—because both men were powerful members of the Trilateral Commission and their appointment to key positions would signal a surrender of White House control to the Commission.

 

Vance and Brzezinski were appointed secretary of state and national security advisor, as Jordan feared. But he didn’t quit. He became Carter’s chief of staff.

 

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

SECRET SOCIETIES AND DESTRUCTION

 

SECRET SOCIETIES AND DESTRUCTION

 

I’ve searched all the parks in all the cities—and no found no statues of Committees.”

GK Chesterton

 

JUNE 27, 2011. When I wrote THE SECRET BEHIND SECRET SOCIETIES (now available as an e-book at www.nomorefakenews.com), it occurred to me that these groups carried the seeds of their own destruction.

 

This was very good news.

 

But in order for that destruction to be realized, many people would have to understand the fact that reality was and is created.

 

It can be invented by committee, or it can be invented by the individual. This is a hard fact.

 

In the first case, you end up with a uniform sameness (which can be comforting). In the second case, you end up with a fantastically varied landscape; you don’t have one basic reality; you have millions and millions.

 

The mere idea and prospect of such a revolution is so unsettling to many people, they actually prefer the secret-society approach, regardless of the price they have to pay for it.

 

This is the fundamental trade-off that has generated much of human history.

 

We can even take this notion of radical decentralization into the arena of science, which is supposed to be the most uniform of all endeavors—as in, there is one science and it is based on pure discovery of the truth.

 

Is that so?

 

Imagine there are five million physicists, each of whom has no loyalty to the common consensus about underlying particles and energies. Striking out on his own, each physicist develops a unique view of how the universe operates—and each theory can be confirmed by experiments.

 

Each of these formulations of basic physics—though they all appear to be competing and contradictory—results in a different kind of technology that can be successfully applied to the building of machines.

 

And it all started with the idea that an individual can invent his own reality.

 

This is one of the implications of my book.

 

The notion that the basic human game stays the same is the very definition of psychosis. It is the first proposition of secret societies, and therefore, these groups are, in a genuine sense, the guardians of civilization.

 

As we have come to know and accept civilization.

 

Way out ahead of this blind acceptance is the blazing pulse of a different surmise and suspicion:

 

EACH INDIVIDUAL CAN INVENT HIS OWN REALITY, AND THAT REALITY CAN IMPACT AND REVOLUTIONIZE THE PUBLIC DOMAIN IN EVERY ASPECT.

 

This is exactly why secret societies have always massed their assets on the border—the border that separates uniformity from the much greater power of individual creation, aka magic.

 

This is where we are. On this cusp.

 

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

YET ANOTHER ILLUSION

 

YET ANOTHER ILLUSION

 

JUNE 26, 2011. It was suggested that the composer, Maurice Ravel, was writing “artificial music.”

 

To which is he replied, “But do these people never come up with the idea that I might be artificial by nature?”

 

A beautiful joke.

 

A person lives according to his nature. He can do no more than discover his true nature and follow it. Nature dictates; we fall into line—such facile ideas presume that every individual has some rock-bottom IS he has to conform to, whether he knows it or not. He is predisposed, by forces greater than he will ever understand, to be a certain kind of person.

 

Well, people try to defy and ignore and sideline and minimize the notion of freedom every way they can. And if they need to posit some sort of overriding chain-link principle, they will. Whatever it takes.

 

Face it, people love slavery. They’ll grow that garden in the strangest places.

 

And one of them is NATURE. As in the natural world, or a person’s underlying nature.

 

Meanwhile the truth is there is absolutely no limit or boundary on imagination. What a person creates isn’t determined by anything other than his own choices. And those choices can be changed or scrubbed at the drop of a hat.

 

Your underlying nature” is a psychological spin on a religious concept. It’s yet another thing to bow down to and worship. It’s yet another false trail.

 

I’ve mentioned before that many teachers of writing bray to their students, “Write about what you know.”

 

This is like saying, “My son loves candy. So we’re pointing him in the direction of growing up to be a candy salesman.”

 

Whereas I would tell students, “By all means, write about what you don’t know.”

 

If you don’t know it, INVENT IT.

 

Stop praying at the altar of the inevitable. “The inevitable” is just another con.

 

WELCOME TO THE CHURCH OF NATURE. WE MEET EVERY SUNDAY TO DISCOVER WHAT IS INEVITABLE, SO WE CAN FOLLOW IT TO THE SHORE OF SALVATION AND ENLIGHTENMENT. DROP SOME MONEY IN THE PLATE.

 

This lunacy has an analogue in anthropology. Imagine this—a group of researchers comes back from a distant planet with the following report:

 

Well, we investigated the XYZ people on Ty-1-B, and we found they were free. Each person was intensely creative and imagined and invented what he wanted to.”

 

No, no, no, no. That’s not going to fly. An anthropologist is supposed to discover the binding customs and traditions and rituals and practices of the tribe or clan. He’s supposed to articulate these behaviors as if they are THE NATURE of the people being studied. He may not say that, but that’s the implication. Otherwise, he’s screwed. Otherwise, he just says, “Well, they CHOOSE. They’re FREE. They CREATE.”

 

And that would destroy the profession of anthropology.

 

I’d much rather launch a social science called un-anthropology. Its single tenet is:

 

YOU HAVE NO UNDERLYING NATURE.

 

Goodbye. That’s the end of un-anthropology. It lasted three seconds, but in those three seconds it did more good than all the studies and expeditions of all the nosy anthros in the world.

 

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

GOING TO THE MOVIES

 

GOING TO THE MOVIES

 

JUNE 26, 2011. His Girl Friday (Cary Grant, Rosalind Russell) generates a breakneck conversational effervescence that’s unmatched in film-comedy.

 

Ros Russell is steel, glass, and tight-satin immortality. But she’s also in love with Cary, hopelessly, beyond her control.

 

Howard Hawks delivers a film of merciless happiness; the rocket you’re in is outfitted with chairs whose comfort is custom-made for the far edges of your worldly intelligence.

 

And if you wanted real religion, the film would be playing in your chapel every day as the central object of contemplation.

 

In acting schools, teachers say, “Reveal! Don’t indicate!” His GirlFriday contains not a single word or gesture that indicates.

 

The first time I saw it, on television, I lost track of my living room, and whether it was day or night.

 

It was as if curtains had parted on an astral island where the law of gravity was banished, and the inhabitants walked on the earth merely because they loved to.

 

Without a particle of compromise, His Girl lets you know life can be lived in this spirit—feet in the soil, head in the sky, as Dostoevsky said.

 

Cary Grant plays a con man you would let into your home to take away every possession you have—and you’d be ecstatic about paying the price to have him there for a little while. He’s Hermes, the trickster god, in a suit and tie, rolling along.

 

During the film, a few characters are dented, but by the end there are no victims. Everyone finds his level.

 

Jane Roberts, author of the Seth books, wrote about an experience in which she saw a town’s Main Street spread out before her so lucidly that it rose to the level of being an archetype of itself.

 

His Girl does a similar trick. The first time you see it, you find it hard to believe you haven’t seen it before. You know some part of yourself has been waiting for and anticipating it. And there it is. Ordinary reality transformed without ever having to leave the street.

 

Cary Grant carries so much magnetic force around with him—but as in no other film, he meets his female match. Russell keeps up with him, line by line, and when she gives ground, it’s only because the plot needs that small movement. Dissatisfied with the way her character was written, she brought in her own writer to lift her to Grant’s level. It worked. That, plus bits of stirring improvisation, of which Hawks happily approved, made the Grant-Russell duo unique wizardry.

 

You want magic? This is it.

 

For the past few months, I’ve been writing articles that point out the nonsense of assuming magic is always and only an ancient subject. Magic has to be explored as something that can be invented now. Well, His Girl Friday, made in 1940, is as modern as it gets.

 

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com