Louis Wynne, Ph.D., psychologist

In order to understand what is driving the push to “identify” teen-agers with suicidal tendencies, it is helpful to look at a little history. First, let’s ask the question: What diseases were the top killers of American 100 years ago; and what are the top killers now?

The US Mortality Data for 1908 show that these diseases were America’s top-ranked killers:

Typhoid fever, measles, scarlet fever, whooping cough, diphtheria, and tuberculosis

The top-ranked kilers of Americans in 2004 were:

Heart disease, cancer, stroke, chronic lower respiratory diseases, accidents, and diabetes

It is important to understand how these two groups of diseases differ from each other: the first group is made up entirely of infectious diseases; the second group is composed entirely of diseases brought on by lifestyle: diet, smoking, lack of exercise, etc.

 Now, what has this got to do with TeenScreen?  (to be continued)

On Saturday, March 1, 2008 the Business Day section of the New York Times featured FDA’s approval of this new antidepressant. It is interesting that there is no attempt to hide what is really going on here: Wyeth Pharmaceuticals’ patent on Effexor XR is about to expire and, to maintain the company’s profit picture, another drug is needed. While details are still scanty, it is likely that Pristiq (where on earth do they get these names?) will be no more effective than other antidepressants–that is, barely if at all more effective (whatever that means) than a placebo. In other words, it is not patients’ health and well-being that is the goal; it is corporate profits.

It is a fair bet that Pristiq has not been tested “head-to-head” against other antidepressants manufactured by other drug companies. We can also be sure that the FDA approved Pristiq based on a length of treatment far shorter than it will actually be prescribed for. Remember that the FDA approved Prozac on the basis of only 6 weeks’ testing. (The logic was, I believe, that, if any adverse “side-effects” were going to show up, they’d show up sooner rather than later!)

It is probably also a safe bet that the experimental design was tampered with to exclude “non-responders,” and that physicians were paid handsomely for recruiting patients into the pre-approval studies. 

Please check out my interview on NPR, February 15, 2008. We talked about family black sheep. The website is weekendamerica.org

A recent PBS Frontline program described the excessive use of medications such as Risperdal and other so-called atypical antipsychotics with elementary school-age children. The program was notable for its evasion of the most important question in mental health today. 

One might say that any and all psychiatric medicating of anyone, including children, is excessive. But to take this position is to miss the essential point: the unwanted behavior of children (and teens and adults) has nothing to do with illness of any kind. Whether medications ”work” (or do not work), or whether they are being used excessively, diverts our attention from the more important question: What is there in the context within which the child is living his/her life that might account for the distressing behavior?

The re-contextualizing of their child’s behavior is something that families shy away from. It is potentially embarrassing, and a person (like myself) who raises the issue is often accused of blaming or stigmatizing family menbers, or dredging up the past. 

True! I’m guilty! Not of blaming or dredging up the past, but of pleading with families to see how their own unwitting and unintentional actions have contributed to what is in reality a family problem, not an illness that their child has.

It is clear to me that the producers of Frontline are not yet ready to grapple with that issue.