RAISE Study Out Of Sync With Media Reports

7
73

Writing on his 1 Boring Old Man blog, Dr. Mickey Nardo reflects on the media frenzy around the RAISE study and asks why the prescription data has not been released. He adds skepticism about the political motives of the potentially overblown results, which he sees as a clear push for increased mental health funding.

Article →

Support MIA

MIA relies on the support of its readers to exist. Please consider a donation to help us provide news, essays, podcasts and continuing education courses that explore alternatives to the current paradigm of psychiatric care. Your tax-deductible donation will help build a community devoted to creating such change.

$
Select Payment Method
Personal Info

Credit Card Info
This is a secure SSL encrypted payment.

Billing Details

Donation Total: $20 One Time

7 COMMENTS

  1. Thanks for validating my paranoia, guys. I think Dr. Mickey is right to smell something a bit fishy … sad to say.

    It is wonderful to see the eagerness with which the news of this study has been embraced. People are starving for some sort of approach to “psychiatric illness” (whatever that may be) that is marginally human, and that might take an interest in the prospect of a life worth living. However, I don’t trust the study itself, and want to see the details.

    My biggest question: If Dr. Kane is so sold on the prospects for less physically and mentally damaging “chemotherapy” and more communication, then why has he signed on to direct the PRELAPSE Study for Otsuka? (See my column on “The once and future Abilify” from back in May.)

    That study will randomly select several hundred young people going through a first psychotic episode and assign them to monthly (fairly high dose) depot injections of Abilify for TWO YEARS. The two studies would appear to lead in exactly opposite directions. And anyone who believes the sales pitch for the RAISE study should be horrified by the PRELAPSE study, it seems to me.

    Then again, I guess it pays the same. What gives, Doctor Kane?

  2. Am I the only one who finds this comment a bit insulting?

    “In spite of the persistent divisive rhetoric, there seems to be a developing consensus about the treatment of psychotic mental illness [schizophrenia]. The notion that the only treatment is antipsychotic medication ‘for life’ has been laid to rest [largely through the efforts of Robert Whitaker and his colleagues at Mad in America]. Most agree that the medication is indicated for acute psychosis, but controversy persists about maintenance [in general, independent of the advice given, the patients themselves don’t continue to take it long term]. There’s a developing consensus that ongoing care for these patients from a mental health system or provider is essential, over and beyond the issue of medication. The form of that ongoing care is unclear, and the subject of heated debate. Most hope for some way to identify these patients before a psychotic break [but worry that it will lead to overmedication]. There is a concern, mainly in the lay population, that these patients are dangerous.”

    Especially given the reality that the antipsychotics / neuroleptics, in high doses or combined with other drugs, are known to cause “psychosis” and “hallucinations.” The medical proof from drugs.com:

    “Agents with anticholinergic properties (e.g., sedating antihistamines; antispasmodics; neuroleptics; phenothiazines; skeletal muscle relaxants; tricyclic antidepressants; disopyramide) … may result in … the anticholinergic intoxication syndrome … Central symptoms may include memory loss, disorientation, incoherence, hallucinations, psychosis, delirium, hyperactivity, twitching or jerking movements, stereotypy, and seizures.”

    And the psychiatrists aren’t smart enough to distinguish between the central symptoms of anticholinergic intoxication syndrome and the almost exact same symptoms of “schizophrenia.” One must wonder what percent of so called “schizophrenics” and “bipolar” patients today are actually just dealing with a completely iatrogenic illness, given this reality.

    It strikes me that given this information, it is actually the psychiatrists who are dangerous.

    • By the way, the only doctors who ever thought I was “dangerous,” were doctors who were paranoid of a non-existent malpractice suit, due to a “bad fix” on a broken bone of mine. And doctors who wanted to cover up the medical evidence of the sexual abuse of my small child for this pedophilia covering up religion:

      https://books.google.com/books?id=xI01AlxH1uAC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

      And doctors who were paranoid of a non-existant malpractice suit, due to a medically confessed “Foul up” with drugs given to cover up the “bad fix” and child abuse.

      Thankfully, an ethical pastor of a different religion explained that I’d dealt with the “dirty little secret of the two original educated professions.” Meaning the psychiatric industry has always been in the business of covering up child abuse for the religions and easily recognized iatrogenesis for the incompetent mainstream doctors.

      And you’ll be glad to know the most recent psychologist I saw did not consider me “dangerous” or in need of any “ongoing care,” but instead recommended I go back to school and get my master’s in public health. And my current PCP does not consider me “dangerous” or in need of “on going [psychiatric] care” either, and he, too, was impressed with my medical research abilities.

      Perhaps it’d be wiser not to claim all writers on this website are “dangerous” and in need of “on going care,” especially since you do not know anything about us personally.

      • Oh, and in regards to Nardo’s comment, “independent of the advice given, the patients themselves don’t continue to take [the neuroleptics] long term.”

        Some of us did make the mistake of trusting in unethical and incompetent psychiatrists, but were weaned off the drugs by psychiatrists (inappropriately, of course), and based upon medical advise.

        My last psychiatrist weaned me off the drugs and told me I did not need his services, after I quoted my oral surgeon, who stated the blatantly obvious, “antipsychotics don’t cure concerns of child abuse.”

        And it does seem that psychiatrists misdiagnosing ACEs / abused children as “psychotic.” Then likely creating the negative symptoms of “schizophrenia” via neuroleptic induced deficit syndrome or creating the positive symptoms of “schizophrenia,” via the central symptoms of neuroleptic or polypharmacy induced anticholinergic intoxication syndrome, does seem to be a likely etiology for 2/3’s of all “schizophrenics” today.

        http://psychcentral.com/news/2006/06/13/child-abuse-can-cause-schizophrenia/18.html

        Although, I do see why psychiatrists would be embarrassed by having such “dirty little secrets” exposed.

    • Until and unless they acknowledge the truth – the pseudo-science drug racket social-control regime known as “psychiatry” will remain the most dangerous iatrogenic-harm producing factor in modern society. Psychs are in major denial and delusion. Psychiatry has done, and continues to do, far more harm than good.
      There is NO legitimate SCIENCE that can contradict what I’ve written here, and much legitimate science that tends to support my position, but, like I said – it’s all about the DELUSIONS and DENIAL of PSYCHIATRISTS….(….except some of them here, of course!/
      (c)2016, Tom Clancy, Jr., *NON-fiction