
|
The Wellbeing Foundation
announces that both Depression Dialogues and Psychosis Dialogues meetings are suspended until further notice. Please consult the website 'Events' page regularly for updates Scientific papers expose the ignorance of eight professors On Monday 19 October the Irish Times published a letter
from eight professors of psychiatry denying any link between the
use of antidepressants and homicidal acts. The ignorance of the
scientific literature displayed by these eight leading teachers in
their field is astounding, appalling and downright dangerous, as they
are responsible for graduating thousands of psychiatrists into their
profession.
Read two of many scientific papers that prove them to be completely wrong: here Read letters replying to their inaccuracies here Irish Times censors Corry reply to false allegations The Irish Times has censored the views of people writing to point out the well-recorded dangers of SSRI antidepressants, including dropping a letter from Dr Michael Corry. ![]() Holmquist also praised the Irish Medicines Board, a regulator funded by the drug companies, as a source of unbiased information. She did so despite the fact that the Oireachtas Committee on the Adverse Side-Effects of Pharmaceuticals recommended the break-up of the IMB in 2007 — a recommendation which the Government has chosen to ignore — because of its cosy links with the drug makers. Holmquist's far-from-impartial piece was followed by the letter from the eight professors published on 19 October, gushing their congratulations on her support. Since then one letter taking issue with these views has been printed, that of Dr Orla O'Donovan on 22 October. Dr Corry wrote to the Times the same day to rebut the false accusations made against him by the eight professors and to set out his views and some of the evidence implicating SSRIs in aggression, violence and homicide more clearly . The Irish Times did not publish his letter. Instead the newspaper has left false accusations against him to stand uncorrected. Basil Miller of the Wellbeing Foundation wrote to the paper on 24 October, expressing astonishment and disquiet that the eight bosses of teaching departments of psychiatry in Ireland publicly profess to be ignorant of the dangers of the drugs they recommend, despite extensive evidence. His letter questioned the effect of such ignorance on the thousands of students who pass through their departments and qualify as psychiatrists and stated his belief that this poses a continuing danger to health service users. The Irish Times has not published his letter either. The Irish Times has not published any other letter challenging the eight professors or Kate Holmquist's article — and we are aware that several have been sent to the Letters Editor. This blatant censorship will be challenged. One way the public can help is by adding to the pile of letters on the editor's desk — send contributions to lettersed@irish-times.ie with the headline 'Antidepressants and homicide'. Guidelines can be found here
The shocking evidence on electroshock: no therapy DUBLIN, 2 October 2008: ElectroConvulsive
Therapy
is no therapy at all. That is the clear conclusion from research
carried out by leading figures in the field and which the Wellbeing
Foundation republishes here as a public service in the
continuing
debate on ECT (see right-hand column for links to download these
papers).
Anti-ECT campaigners, whether lay people or qualified doctors, have been vilified by certain supporters of ECT in the psychiatric profession and accused of producing no evidence to support their claims that ECT is both damaging and ineffective. Here, then, is that evidence, and it is safe to say that this evidence comes from professionals far more eminent in their field than any of our critics here in Ireland. Most of this evidence has been available to professionals and the curious public for over a year. For example, the first scientific paper we reproduce, 'The Cognitive Effects of Electroconvulsive Therapy in Community Settings', was published in the journal Neuropsychopharmacology in 2007. One dates from 1998, the others from 2005, 2006 and again 2007. One might be tempted to think, from the subsequent contributions by certain Irish psychiatrists, that the latter are ignorant of this important research or have not read and evaluated it. One of the notable things about the the first paper mentioned is that its lead author, Harold J Sackeim, is a prominent advocate of the medical model and of the school of biological psychiatry, a school whose very basis we question. Dr Sackeim has for many years been a leading advocate of ECT. Yet in this paper he comes as close as one could expect to a public recantation of his previous views. Dr Sackeim, to his credit, has led a team which collected evidence, solid, empirical evidence, of the cognitive impairments (read, memory loss and intellectual impairment) caused by ECT even in its 'least worst' form. And Dr Sackeim has taken account of that evidence — he now rejects, at the very least, the widespread use of ECT, and more particularly the use of most forms of ECT (certainly those widely used here in Ireland). This gamekeeper has turned poacher. Would that his Irish colleagues take note, and even follow suit. The other papers are as valuable, and all give evidence supporting and bolstering our view that ECT is medically dangerous and should be banned. The earliest is Dr Peter Breggin's famous study from 1998, 'Electroshock: scientific, ethical, and political issues', published in the International Journal of Risk & Safety in Medicine . 'Patients' perspectives on electroconvulsive therapy: a systematic review' was published in the British Medical Journal in January 2005; 'Memory and cognitive effects of ECT: informing and assessing patients' in Advances in Psychiatric Treatment in 2006; 'Cognitive rehabilitation: assessment and treatment of persistent memory impairments following ECT' in the same journal in 2007; and we include, for its inherent interest and for providing some profound insights by those on the sharp end, 'The Electroshock Quotationary' by Leonard Roy Frank, published in June 2006.
Most institutional psychiatrists in Ireland have been too fond of claiming that their profession is united in advocating ECT and in rejecting accusations that it damages mental and intellectual functioning in several serious ways. This is simply not true: their profession, at least elsewhere, is seriously divided on this issue and cannot agree either on the efficacy of ECT or its serious effects. The evidence is clear. In such circumstances, the politicians who will shortly return to the debate on the three senators' Bill to ban involuntary electroshock must take the approach of considering primarily the political, ethical and human rights aspects of the current ECT regime in our mental health system and avoid the medical debate. Even if they were to conduct hearings into the medical arguments, with evidence from all camps (including patient groups and 'consumer' advocates), it would most likely be fruitless — a rabbit hole of metaphysical claim and counter-claim from which they might not ever return. The issue should be decided on one criterion — do current rules on the administration of ECT conform even to the minimum standards required to uphold the human rights of the patient? The answer to this is clearly NO — and on that basis, and that basis alone, the senators' Bill should be passed into law. Senate hears condemnation of
'brutal' shock therapy
The
campaign against ECT (Electro
Convulsive Therapy) received a big boost on 25 June 2008 when a Private
Members Bill was debated for two hours in Seanad Eireann.Proposed by Green Party senators Deirdre de Burca and Dan Boyle together with independent senator David Norris, the Bill deals with two provisions of the Mental Health Act 2001. One is section 58, which refers to psychosurgery, the surgical removal or modification of parts of the brain to achieve a psychological aim — lobotomy. The other is Section 59, dealing with ECT. The Bill would ban the use of ECT without the consent of the patient concerned. At present, electric shock treatment is widely used on involuntary patients in mental hospitals in Ireland. All the senators who spoke supported the notion of having a debate on these issues, though not all supported the specific amendment proposed on ECT. Those who did not support it outright nonetheless favoured a thorough investigation by the legislature of the issue, perhaps at hearings by the Joint Committee on Health and Children, and were sympathetic to the need to protect mental health service users from the arbitrary use of what they recognise as, to say the least, a "controversial" method of treatment. The debate was adjourned without a vote, so the Bill lives to be debated further following the investigations proposed by several senators and accepted by the proposers. Now, then, is the time to write to senators and TDs demanding that they support this Bill. You can download e-mail addresses for both Dail deputies and Senators here and here. A number of anti-ECT campaigners from around the country attended the debate, joined in a welcome act of solidarity by Professor Ivor Browne, retired Professor of Psychiatry at UCD and formerly Chief Psychiatrist of the Dublin and Eastern health region. The group included John McCarthy of Mad Pride Ireland, who contested the last general election as an independent candidate representing mental health service users, Drs Michael Corry and Aine Tubridy, and authors Mary and Jim Maddock of MindFreedom Ireland. The entire debate, well worth reading, is available on the Oireachtas Eireann website here. Download the Bill here |
Moloney rejects anti-ECT Bill but promises debate
The Bill to outlaw the
forced administration of Electro-shock 'therapy', introduced into the
Senate in June 2008, was debated again on Wednesday 2 December. Corry complaint psych boss linked to five drug makersUnfortunately, Mental Health Minister John Moloney did not accept the Bill put forward by senators Deirdre de Burca, Dan Boyle and David Norris, but he did make some promises and set down a timetable for further discussion with action to follow. De Burca and Boyle proposed to limit the thrust of their original Bill to a provision which would have removed Section 59 (b) of the Mental Health Act 2001, which permits forced administration of ECT once two consultant psychiatrists have approved the forced administration. Section 59 would thus read only: 59.—
(1) A programme of electro-convulsive therapy shall not be administered
to a patient unless the patient gives his or her consent in writing to
the administration of the programme of therapy. Senators, notably
Dan Boyle himself, made some interesting contributions to the debate,
which you can read in full here or download here.
Boyle cautioned in particular against the false standard of legislating
for the extreme case — in this instance, the extremely rare risk of an
individual risking death if not given ECT — so that a large number of
persons at no such risk are then wrongly given the 'extreme' treatment.(2) The Commission shall make rules providing for the use of electro-convulsive therapy and a programme of electro-convulsive therapy shall not be administered to a patient except in accordance with such rules. Minister Moloney asked the proposers to postpone debate on their Bill to allow further consultation, and he gave a commitment to conclude that consultation by March 2010. He proposes to have advocates of forced ECT and opponents come to give evidence to a session of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Health and Children setting out their points of view, sometime in the first quarter of 2010. While there are obvious dangers in this approach, there are also opportunities. The Wellbeing Foundation urges our supporters who have evidence to give before the Oireachtas committee to write immediately both to the Minister and to the Chairman of the Joint Committee asking to give evidence to the Committee. As all the pro-ECT lobbyists will be present in force, it is important that service users and anti-ECT campaigners be equally strongly represented. For the committee, write directly to the Chairman, Seán Ó Fearghaíl TD, Houses of the Oireachtas, Leinster House, Kildare Street, Dublin 2 or email the clerk to the committee, Ms Sinead McCann, at sinead.mccann@oireachtas.ie. To reach the Minister, write to John Moloney TD, Minister of State at Health and Children, Hawkins House, Dublin 2 or email minister_moloney@health.gov.ie. Dr Michael Corry had a letter on the subject published in the Irish Times on Thursday 10 December, which you can read here. In it he appeals to service users and campaigners to take up the Minister's invitation. The senior psychiatrist Professor
Ted Dinan of University College, Cork, who has laid a complaint against
Dr Michael Corry at the Medical Council, has been paid or had his work
financed by at least five different drug companies. Seroxat to blame for baby's heart defects, says US juryIn a letter to the Council's Fitness to Practice Committee, Dinan said Dr Corry had made comments about a tragedy "without regard for the distress" caused to the families; had "made allegations regarding the competence" of a colleague"; "made statements regarding a diagnosis without ever seeing the patient"; and made "statements regarding the pharmacology of antidepressants". Dinan is an enthusiastic advocate of SSRIs and SNRIs and has declared his close relations with several drug companies as follows: "Dr Dinan has received honoraria [cash payments] from and is a member of the speakers board and advisory board for Lilly, Pfizer, Lundbeck, and Organon." His Cork Neuroscience Group is funded by, among others, GlaxoSmithKline, maker of Seroxat, and the Wellcome Trust (an offspring of GSK's parent companies which funds biomedical research). See here More here A family has been awarded $2.5m
(€1.7m) in damages after a jury in Philadelphia decided that the
British-made antidepressant Seroxat was responsible for their
three-year-old son's heart defects. Full story here How antidepressants led a young man to murder On the night of August 15/16, Shane
Clancy stabbed his friend, Sebastian Creane, to death in Bray, Co
Wicklow, seriously injured
his ex-girlfriend and almost killed his victim's brother. He then
stabbed himself to death.
He had been taking SSRI antidepressants. Police said he may have been 'overdosing'. In any case, he had been prescribed the drugs by a GP rather than a psychiatrist, after presenting with the symptoms of sadness and a broken heart after breaking up with his girlfriend. These drugs are dangerous, and they don't work. Their use has become widespread, and prescribing is uncontrolled and unmonitored, as Ali Bracken demonstrated by going undercover as a 'depressed patient' in the weeks that followed. In the Sunday Tribune of 4 October, Ali Bracken reported that Shane Clancy was given a three-week supply of antidepressant medication by a pharmacy on the day before the tragic events, despite his doctor instructing he should only be supplied one week's dosage at a time because of a previous overdose.
Read our full coverage of this important
and tragic sequence of events here
WARNING! Most
psychiatric drugs can cause withdrawal reactions, sometimes including
life-threatening emotional and physical withdrawal problems. In short,
it is not only dangerous to start taking psychiatric drugs, it can also be dangerous to stop them.
Withdrawal from psychiatric drugs should only be done carefully under experienced clinical supervision.
Michael Corry and Nuria O'Mahony on Prime Time Nuria O'Mahony,
the Cork nurse and mental health campaigner whose husband killed
himself while on GlaxoSmithKline's SSRI Seroxat, and Dr Michael Corry
were interviewed for a Prime
Time programme on 8 September.
Watch the clip from the programme here The Final Solution: the campaign to stop ECT Electro Convulsive
Therapy
(ECT) is the deliberate administration of electric shocks to the brain.
This is how it was described by the British Department of
Health
in 2007: "ECT is carried out under general anaesthetic, and a
strong muscle relaxant is administered to patients to prevent
the
violent muscle spasms that the treatment would otherwise
cause.
The patient is strapped on their back to a flat table which, in the
event of a patient vomiting, can be spun upside down.
"In the presence of an anaesthetist and psychiatrist, electrodes are attached to the patient's head and the electrical voltage is administered until the psychiatrist observes the patient's toe twitch. This is a sign that the patient, despite the relaxant drugs, is convulsing. Up to 400 volts are used." ![]() ECT being administered It is better described as a Holocaust of the brain: a brutal Final Solution which must be stopped. The time to abolish electric shock treatment is now. As a first step, we have carried out research and have collected the testimony of those who have been subjected to this barbarity. Our survey is now complete. Download Michael Corry's The Final Solution
The Wellbeing Foundation has published a new pamphlet, The Final Solution, by Dr Michael Corry. It is available free as an e-book. To get your copy to read on-screen or print out, just click here You will need Adobe Reader to open the document. If you don't already have it, download it here Wellbeing debates Irish College
of Psychiatrists
Wellbeing Foundation spokesman Basil Miller went head to head with Consilia Walsh, chair of the Irish College of Psychiatrists, in the Irish Times on Monday 7 July. Miller focused on the human rights deficiencies in Irish mental health legislation and demanded that the government support the Private Members Bill introduced by senators De Burca, Boyle and Norris, saying that it would set in place the absolute minimum standards of protection for the psychologically distressed set out by the World Health Organisation and the United Nations. Walsh defended ECT as a treatment, cherry-picking the evidence to support her case. She did not once mention the human and civil rights of those detained, nor the continued flouting of medical ethics by psychiatrists in the health services who impose invasive and dangerous therapies on 'their' patients against the will of the latter. Read the article here, or download all articles, news reports, comments and letters recently published in the Irish Times here Corry talks to Pat Kenny Michael Corry spoke to Pat Kenny on Friday 9 May 2008, on his radio show on RTE1. You can listen to that segment of the show here, or find it in the entire show, here Irish Times article
says 'barbaric age' must end
You can read a
hard-hitting piece by Dr Michael Corry which lays out all the medical
arguments against the use of ECT in the Irish Times of 25
June 2008. For online IT
readers, the piece is here.
If you wish to read it or download it from our website, go here
The Sunday Independent reports our ECT campaign here and here, with some letters from readers here More resources to help There is a list of a wide selection of books, articles, and websites with useful and helpful material on our sister website, depressiondialogues.ie, including Going Mad? and Depression: An Emotion, Not A Disease, by Michael Corry and Aine Tubridy, Beyond Prozac by Terry Lynch, and Medicines Out Of Control? by Charles Medawar and Anita Hardon, together with sites such as Dr Peter Breggin's website and many more. You'll find access here To download the scientific papers
which
we are republishing as a contribution to the debate on ECT, please
click on the following links (year of publication). The files are in
PDF form, so you will need Adobe Reader or some equivalent to open and
read them.
In chronological order, there are five papers: 1. 1998: ECT: scientific, ethical, political issues 2. 2005: Patients' perspectives on ECT 3. 2006: Memory & cognitive effects 4. 2007: Assessment & treatment 5. 2007: The cognitive effects And the Quotationary: 2006 None of these is an easy read. All are highly technical. For the general reader, we recommend in most cases close study of the Abstract and Conclusions. They alone testify both to the damage ECT causes and to the cover-up of this damage by the profession in Ireland. Over the next months, we will present our own evaluations of the evidence in these papers and the implications for policy on these matters. Meanwhile, here is Philip Barton's take on Dr Harold Sackeim, his recantation of support for ECT, and why he led the charge in favour of ECT for so long: Direct Hit Corry slams ECT 'cover-up' by
mental health agencies
In a hard-hitting
article in the Irish
Medical Times,
Dr Michael Corry analyses the cover-up of ECT by both the Mental Health
Commission and the Inspector of Mental Health Services.
Read it hereA neuroscientist's view on the
effects of electro-shock
Eminent
neuroscientist Professor Peter Sterling is not the only brain expert to
oppose the use of ECT; many neurosurgeons, neuroscientists, and
neuro-biologists have condemned ECT as dangerous and irrational. But
Sterling manages to sum up the case in four brief pages, well supported
with references to other practitioners.
Download his paper here
or read it here |
||||||||||




