I previously reported numerous statistics which implicated psychiatry’s creation of ‘ADHD’ as the root cause of our heroin epidemic. Overdoses are killing so many young adults that they have shortened the mean lifespan of white Americans.1 It is likely only for whites, since white kids are the only ones commonly ‘treated’ for ‘ADHD.’ Stimulants are the drug class most prescribed to teenagers;2 nearly 10% of American male teens are started and led down a path of lifelong drug addiction via their being given daily stimulants for “ADHD.”3 (Stimulants sedate young children but produce euphoria and are addictive for teenagers and adults.) Doctors do this despite or perhaps because these are the prescription drugs teenagers love to abuse the most.4 These amphetamines then often become gateway drugs to opiate pill use, which can then lead to heroin.
Doctors try to justify their actions by claiming that addiction is less likely to occur if addictive drugs are dispensed/supervised by doctors to ‘treat illness’ than if obtained from dealers, parents, or friends for ‘non-medical use’ (partying). But how can a chemical know what it’s being used for and then decide to only be addictive if it’s obtained illicitly? Can it think: “I had better be on my best behavior and not cause trouble, since doc is watching closely” in one situation, and: “Doc is not around, so I can get away with being a real bad boy now. When the cat’s away, the mouse can play!” in the other?
Of course not. If a chemical is intrinsically addictive, you’ll get addicted to it if you stay on it too long, no matter how or why you get it. If a 10-ton boulder is dropped on your head, you won’t get less injured if it is done by a doctor. Besides, ADHD is not a real disease, so getting high via drugs prescribed for it isn’t real medical treatment, anyway. It’s just using drugs.
In fact, addiction is actually more likely to develop if you get stimulants from doctors — if you get them from friends or dealers, you’ll likely get only a few pills at a time due to high street cost and limited supply. It won’t be enough to get addicted right away, especially since you will probably only use them on weekends. You will have time to think that maybe it wouldn’t be a good idea to get more pills from the friend/dealer. But MDs give full-month supplies of affordable (insurance-covered) stimulants at a time, which the prescription says to use daily, and they come with indefinite refills.
Even if you plan to only use them at weekend ‘pill parties’ or all-night cram sessions before tests, with so many euphoria-giving drugs around it’ll be hard to resist taking them more often, since crashes from stimulant highs can be very debilitating/depressing. By month’s end they’ll no longer elicit euphoria, but now you will need them to curb unbearable withdrawals since you’re addicted.This explains why college students who use stimulants to aid grades actually have far lower GPAs.5
Street drug dealers and stimulant-peddling doctors both get clients high and addicted for profit. So there is really no difference between what they do except that doctors are more ‘successful’ at it, since they enjoy many advantages over illicit dealers. Doctors get away with doing it legally, so clients don’t need to put much effort, cash, or risk into getting drugs. Doctors’ clients can’t be fired for drug use, since they’re merely doing ‘needed medical treatment.’ Its legality allows it to be done openly in nice facilities that can be openly advertised. Medical degrees empower doctors to invent legitimate-sounding diseases (such as diagnosing normally immature kids with ‘ADHD’) to lure people in with easy-to-obtain drugs, while passing it off as altruistic desires to relieve the suffering from such ‘illnesses.’ If parents find out their son is scoring ‘speed’ from a meth dealer, they will get angry and stop it. But if their son is given the same amphetamine by a doctor, they will not only allow it, but will probably monitor their son daily to make sure he “takes his meds.” Youths involved in probation, child custody fights, or CPS may even have psych evals court-mandated, which then enforce “medically necessary treatment” with these addictive drugs.
MD degrees also get clients to automatically misplace their trust and faith in doctors and follow all their orders, believing: “It must be safe, effective, and necessary if a doctor prescribed it for my child.” And when withdrawal symptoms inevitably result, doctors can fool their clients into staying on drugs by saying these are really symptoms of their underlying mental illness recurring, whereas street drug clients will likely realize they’re in withdrawal and may thus consider ending their drug use. All of these advantages have enabled psychiatrists to adapt to their therapy niche getting usurped by social workers and psychologists, by usurping the drug-dealing niche from illicit drug dealers. But they are much worse than illicit dealers, since at least you know what you are getting into with illicit dealers — with doctors it may be the last thing you would expect.
So parents: Be warned and wake up — your family is under attack! Don’t offer your children for sacrifice on the altar of modern psychiatry. Biological psychiatrists don’t treat real disease. They lie about kids having disabling illnesses in order to get schools/parents to ruin their upbringings by easing all demands, doing helicopter teaching/parenting, and replacing discipline with sedatives. Then even that’s not enough, so they turn kids into addicts. These MDs are making a real killing.
- Kolata, G, and Cohen, S. “Drug Overdoses Propelling Rise in Mortality Rate of Whites” New York Times, Jan 17, 2016. ↩
- Chai, G, et al. “Trends of Outpatient Prescription Drug Utilization in U.S. Children 2002-2010” Pediatrics 2012, 130, 1, 23-31. ↩
- Express Scripts “Report – Turning Attention to ADHD” Mar 12, 2014. ↩
- “Monitoring the Future Survey 2013” National Institute of Drug Abuse. ↩
- Clegg-Kraynok, et al. “Sleep Quality and Characteristics of College Students Who Use Psychostimulants Non-Medically” Sleep Medicine 2011, 12(6), 596-602. ↩