{"id":207970,"date":"2020-05-28T06:23:47","date_gmt":"2020-05-28T06:23:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=207970"},"modified":"2020-05-31T07:38:37","modified_gmt":"2020-05-31T07:38:37","slug":"epidemic-shocked-that-tests-for-the-virus-are-worthless-you-shouldnt-be","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=207970","title":{"rendered":"Epidemic: Shocked that tests for the virus are worthless? You shouldn\u2019t be"},"content":{"rendered":"

Jon Rappaport \u2013 No More Fake News May 27, 2020<\/strong><\/h1>\n

I\u2019ve written and published many words explaining why the diagnostic tests for the coronavirus are unreliable, inherently worthless, wrong-headed, and deceptive. (For starters, click here<\/strong><\/a><\/span>.)<\/span><\/p>\n

This is not the first time \u201ctesting madness\u201d has been launched. Far from it.<\/span><\/p>\n

In fact, there is a whole branch of medicine which diagnoses patients based on NO TESTS AT ALL.<\/span><\/p>\n

I\u2019m talking about millions of patients. And untold billions in profits. Stretching out more than a century.<\/span><\/p>\n

In my continuing series of articles about the China epidemic, I raise the question of medical experts\u2019 track record of deceit. Why? Because, how can you trust what they say about the so-called epidemic, if they have an unparalleled history of lying and obfuscation?<\/span><\/p>\n

Why, for example, should you take, at face value, their claim that they\u2019ve found a single virus which is causing a major outbreak of disease? Professional liars should not be accorded such a level of respect.<\/span><\/p>\n

In their wretched track record, we come to the whole subject of medical psychiatry. This is where real and deep human suffering\u2014from many different causes\u2014is professionally re-channeled into arbitrary categories of so-called \u201cmental disorders,\u201d requiring treatment with devastating drugs. The fraud is wall to wall.<\/span><\/p>\n

Before we take this journey, a warning: Suddenly withdrawing from psychiatric drugs can be very dangerous, even life-threatening. Withdrawal should be done gradually, supervised by a caring professional who knows what he\u2019s doing. See Breggin.com.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2014Let\u2019s screen everybody to find out if they have mental disorders. Let\u2019s diagnose as many people as possible with mental disorders\u2014<\/span><\/p>\n

The first question to ask is: do these mental disorders have any scientific basis? There are now roughly 300 of them. They multiply like fruit flies.<\/span><\/p>\n

An open secret has been bleeding out into public consciousness for the past ten years.<\/span><\/p>\n

THERE ARE NO DEFINITIVE LABORATORY TESTS FOR ANY SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDER.<\/span><\/p>\n

No defining blood tests, no urine tests, no saliva tests, no brain scans, no genetic assays.<\/span><\/p>\n

And along with that:<\/span><\/p>\n

ALL SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDERS ARE INVENTED, CONCOCTED, NAMED, LABELED, DESCRIBED, AND CATEGORIZED by committees of psychiatrists, from menus of human behaviors.<\/span><\/p>\n

Their findings are published in periodically updated editions of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), printed by the American Psychiatric Association.<\/span><\/p>\n

For years, even psychiatrists have been blowing the whistle on this hazy crazy process of \u201cresearch.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Of course, pharmaceutical companies, who manufacture highly toxic drugs to treat every one of these \u201cdisorders,\u201d are leading the charge to invent more and more mental-health categories, so they can sell more drugs and make more money.<\/span><\/p>\n

In a PBS Frontline episode, Does ADHD Exist?, Dr. Russell Barkley, an eminent professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center, unintentionally spelled out the fraud.<\/span><\/p>\n

PBS FRONTLINE INTERVIEWER: Skeptics say that there\u2019s no biological marker\u2014that it [ADHD] is the one condition out there where there is no blood test, and that no one knows what causes it.<\/span><\/p>\n

BARKLEY: That\u2019s tremendously na\u00efve, and it shows a great deal of illiteracy about science and about the mental health professions. A disorder doesn\u2019t have to have a blood test to be valid. If that were the case, all mental disorders would be invalid\u2026There is no lab test for any mental disorder right now in our science. That doesn\u2019t make them invalid.<\/span><\/p>\n

Oh, indeed, that does make them invalid. Utterly and completely. All 297 mental disorders. Because there are no defining tests of any kind to back up the diagnosis.<\/span><\/p>\n

We are looking at a science that isn\u2019t a science. That\u2019s called fraud. Rank fraud.<\/span><\/p>\n

There\u2019s more. Under the radar, one of the great psychiatric stars, who has been out in front inventing mental disorders, went public. He blew the whistle on himself and his colleagues. And for years, almost no one noticed.<\/span><\/p>\n

His name is Dr. Allen Frances, and he made VERY interesting statements to Gary Greenberg, author of a Wired article: \u201cInside the Battle to Define Mental Illness.\u201d (Dec.27, 2010).<\/span><\/p>\n

Major media never picked up on the interview in any serious way. It never became a scandal.<\/span><\/p>\n

Dr. Allen Frances 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. The DSM-IV eventually listed 297 of them.<\/span><\/p>\n

In an April 19, 1994, New York Times piece, \u201cScientist At Work,\u201d Daniel Goleman called Frances \u201cPerhaps the most powerful psychiatrist in America at the moment\u2026\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Well, sure. If you\u2019re 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\u2019re right up there in the pantheon.<\/span><\/p>\n

Long after the DSM-IV had been put into print, Dr. Frances talked to Wired\u2019s Greenberg and said the following:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThere is no definition of a mental disorder. It\u2019s bullshit. I mean, you just can\u2019t define it.\u201d<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

BANG.<\/span><\/p>\n

That\u2019s on the order of the designer of the Hindenburg, looking at the burned rubble on the ground, remarking, \u201cWell, I knew there would be a problem.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

After a suitable pause, Dr. Frances remarked to Greenberg, \u201cThese concepts [of distinct mental disorders] are virtually impossible to define precisely with bright lines at the borders.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Frances might have been obliquely 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.<\/span><\/p>\n

If this is medical science, a duck is a rocket ship.<\/span><\/p>\n

To repeat, Dr. Frances\u2019 work on the DSM IV allowed for MORE toxic drugs to be prescribed, because the definitions of Bipolar and ADHD were expanded to include more people.<\/span><\/p>\n

Adverse effects of Valproate (given for a Bipolar diagnosis) include:<\/span><\/p>\n

* acute, life-threatening, and even fatal liver toxicity<\/span>
\n* life-threatening inflammation of the pancreas<\/span>
\n* brain damage<\/span><\/p>\n

Adverse effects of Lithium (also given for a Bipolar diagnosis) include:<\/span><\/p>\n

* intercranial pressure leading to blindness<\/span>
\n* peripheral circulatory collapse<\/span>
\n* stupor and coma<\/span><\/p>\n

Adverse effects of Risperdal (given for \u201cBipolar\u201d and \u201cirritability stemming from autism\u201d) include:<\/span><\/p>\n

* serious impairment of cognitive function<\/span>
\n* fainting<\/span>
\n* restless muscles in neck or face, tremors (may be indicative of motor brain damage)<\/span><\/p>\n

Dr. Frances label-juggling act also permitted the definition of ADHD to expand, thereby opening the door for greater and greater use of Ritalin (and other similar amphetamine-like compounds) as the treatment of choice.<\/span><\/p>\n

So\u2026what about Ritalin?<\/span><\/p>\n

In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published a most important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was called \u201cAn Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)\u201d [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].<\/span><\/p>\n

Scarnati listed a large number of adverse effects of Ritalin and cited published journal articles which reported each of these symptoms.<\/span><\/p>\n

For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:<\/span><\/p>\n

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

Let\u2019s go deeper. 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 \u201cmajor tranquilizers\u201d). Risperdal (mentioned above as a drug given to people diagnosed with Bipolar) is one of those major tranquilizers. (source: Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Peter Breggin, St. Martin\u2019s Press, 1991)<\/span><\/p>\n

This psychiatric drug plague is accelerating across the land.<\/span><\/p>\n

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.<\/span><\/p>\n

Here\u2019s a coda:<\/span><\/p>\n

This one is big.<\/span><\/p>\n

The so-called \u201cchemical-imbalance\u201d theory of mental illness is dead.<\/span><\/p>\n

Dr. Ronald Pies, the editor-in-chief emeritus of the Psychiatric Times, laid the theory to rest in the July 11, 2011, issue of the Times with this staggering admission:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIn truth, the \u2018chemical imbalance\u2019 notion was always a kind of urban legend \u2014 never a theory seriously propounded by well-informed psychiatrists.\u201d<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

Boom.<\/span><\/p>\n

Dead.<\/span><\/p>\n

However\u2026urban legend? No. For decades the whole basis of psychiatric drug research, drug prescription, and drug sales has been: \u201cwe\u2019re correcting a chemical imbalance in the brain.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

The problem was, researchers had never established a normal baseline for chemical balance. So they were shooting in the dark. Worse, they were faking a theory. Pretending they knew something when they didn\u2019t.<\/span><\/p>\n

In his 2011 piece in Psychiatric Times, Dr. Pies tries to protect his colleagues in the psychiatric profession with this fatuous remark:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIn the past 30 years, I don\u2019t believe I have ever heard a knowledgeable, well-trained psychiatrist make such a preposterous claim [about chemical imbalance in the brain], except perhaps to mock it\u2026the \u2018chemical imbalance\u2019 image has been vigorously promoted by some pharmaceutical companies, often to the detriment of our patients\u2019 understanding.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Absurd. First of all, many psychiatrists have explained and do explain to their patients that the drugs are there to correct a chemical imbalance.<\/span><\/p>\n

And second, if all well-trained psychiatrists have known, all along, that the chemical-imbalance theory is a fraud\u2026<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2026then why on earth have they been prescribing tons of drugs to their patients\u2026<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2026since those drugs are developed on the false premise that they correct a chemical imbalance?<\/span><\/p>\n

The chemical-imbalance theory is a fake.<\/span><\/p>\n

There are no defining physical tests for any of the 300 so-called mental disorders.<\/span><\/p>\n

All diagnoses are based on arbitrary clusters or menus of human behavior. The drugs are harmful, dangerous, toxic. Some of them induce violence. Suicide, homicide.<\/span><\/p>\n

Prozac, in fact, endured a rocky road in the press for a time. Stories on it rarely appear now. The major media have backed off. But on February 7th, 1991, Amy Marcus\u2019 Wall Street Journal article on the drug carried the headline, \u201cMurder Trials Introduce Prozac Defense.\u201d She wrote, \u201cA spate of murder trials in which defendants claim they became violent when they took the antidepressant Prozac are imposing new problems for the drug\u2019s maker, Eli Lilly and Co.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Also on February 7, 1991, the New York Times ran a Prozac piece headlined, \u201cSuicidal Behavior Tied Again to Drug: Does Antidepressant Prompt Violence?\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

In his landmark book, Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Breggin mentions that the Donahue show (Feb. 28, 1991) \u201cput together a group of individuals who had become compulsively self-destructive and murderous after taking Prozac and the clamorous telephone and audience response confirmed the problem.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Breggin also cites a troubling study from the February 1990 American Journal of Psychiatry (Teicher et al, v.147:207-210) which reports on \u201csix depressed patients, previously free of recent suicidal ideation, who developed intense, violent suicidal preoccupations after 2-7 weeks of fluoxetine [Prozac] treatment. The suicidal preoccupations lasted from three days to three months after termination of the treatment. The report estimates that 3.5 percent of Prozac users were at risk. While denying the validity of the study, Dista Products, a division of Eli Lilly, put out a brochure for doctors dated August 31, 1990, stating that it was adding `suicidal ideation\u2019 to the adverse events section of its Prozac product information.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

An earlier study, from the September 1989 Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, by Joseph Lipiniski, Jr., indicates that, in five examined cases, people on Prozac developed what is called akathisia. Symptoms include intense anxiety, inability to sleep, the \u201cjerking of extremities,\u201d and \u201cbicycling in bed or just turning around and around.\u201d Breggin comments that akathisia \u201cmay also contribute to the drug\u2019s tendency to cause self-destructive or violent tendencies \u2026 Akathisia can become the equivalent of biochemical torture and could possibly tip someone over the edge into self-destructive or violent behavior \u2026 The June 1990 Health Newsletter, produced by the Public Citizen Research Group, reports, \u2018Akathisia, or symptoms of restlessness, constant pacing, and purposeless movements of the feet and legs, may occur in 10-25 percent of patients on Prozac.\u2019\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

The well-known publication, California Lawyer, in a December 1998 article called \u201cProtecting Prozac,\u201d mentions other highly qualified critics of the drug: \u201cDavid Healy, MD, an internationally renowned psychopharmacologist, has stated in sworn deposition that `contrary to Lilly\u2019s view, there is a plausible cause-and-effect relationship between Prozac\u2019 and suicidal-homicidal events. An epidemiological study published in 1995 by the British Medical Journal also links Prozac to increased suicide risk.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

A shocking review-study published in The Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases (1996, v.184, no.2), written by Rhoda L. Fisher and Seymour Fisher, called \u201cAntidepressants for Children,\u201d concludes: \u201cDespite unanimous literature of double-blind studies indicating that antidepressants are no more effective than placebos in treating depression in children and adolescents, such medications continue to be in wide use.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

In wide use. This despite such contrary information and the negative, dangerous effects of these drugs.<\/span><\/p>\n

There are other studies: \u201cEmergence of self-destructive phenomena in children and adolescents during fluoxetine treatment,\u201d published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (1991, vol.30), written by RA King, RA Riddle, et al. It reports self-destructive phenomena in 14% (6\/42) of children and adolescents (10-17 years old) who had treatment with fluoxetine (Prozac) for obsessive-compulsive disorder.<\/span><\/p>\n

July, 1991. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Hisako Koizumi, MD, describes a thirteen-year-old boy who was on Prozac: \u201cfull of energy,\u201d \u201chyperactive,\u201d \u201cclown-like.\u201d All this devolved into sudden violent actions which were \u201ctotally unlike him.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

September, 1991. The Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Author Laurence Jerome reports the case of a ten-year old who moves with his family to a new location. Becoming depressed, the boy is put on Prozac by a doctor. The boy is then \u201chyperactive, agitated \u2026 irritable.\u201d He makes a \u201csomewhat grandiose assessment of his own abilities.\u201d Then he calls a stranger on the phone and says he is going to kill him. The Prozac is stopped, and the symptoms disappear.<\/span><\/p>\n

[What is true about Prozac is true about Paxil or Zoloft or any of the other SSRI antidepressants. And be warned: suddenly withdrawing from any psychiatric drug can be extremely dangerous to the patient.]<\/span><\/p>\n

Dr. Breggin, referring to an official directory of psychiatric disorders, the DSM-III-R, writes that withdrawal from amphetamine-type drugs, including Ritalin, can cause \u201cdepression, anxiety, and irritability as well as sleep problems, fatigue, and agitation.\u201d Breggin then remarks, \u201cThe individual may become suicidal in response to the depression.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

The well-known Goodman and Gilman\u2019s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics reveals a vital fact. It states that Ritalin is \u201cstructurally related to amphetamines \u2026 Its pharmacological properties are essentially the same as those of the amphetamines.\u201d In other words, the only clear difference is legality. And the effects, in layman\u2019s terms, are obvious. You take speed and, sooner or later, you start crashing. You become agitated, irritable, paranoid, delusional, aggressive.<\/span><\/p>\n

In Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Breggin discusses the subject of drug combinations: \u201cCombining antidepressants [e.g., Prozac, Luvox] and psychostimulants [e.g., Ritalin] increases the risk of cardiovascular catastrophe, seizures, sedation, euphoria, and psychosis. Withdrawal from the combination can cause a severe reaction that includes confusion, emotional instability, agitation, and aggression.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

What do the medical experts who make pronouncements about epidemics and psychiatry have in common?<\/span><\/p>\n

They went to medical school. They served internships and residencies. They were trained to believe they were the only authorities in their fields.<\/span><\/p>\n

They permit no basic criticism of their work\u2014for example, they would never consider the charge that the virus supposedly responsible for an epidemic has never been adequately tested for, or isolated, in patients. In the same way, they would never seriously consider the implications of the fact that there are no defining laboratory tests for any so-called mental disorder.<\/span><\/p>\n

They believe they are kings of knowledge, and no one else has the truth.<\/span><\/p>\n

They must protect their turf.<\/span><\/p>\n

They rely on government protection and collusion and endorsement to sustain their basic lies.<\/span><\/p>\n

They are \u201cborn from the same egg.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe are MEDICAL. Therefore, we are right.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

As I\u2019ve been demonstrating in this, and other articles, they\u2019re WRONG.<\/span><\/p>\n

Destructively wrong.<\/span><\/p>\n

Jon Rappoport<\/span><\/p>\n

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED<\/strong><\/a><\/span>, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX<\/span><\/strong><\/a>, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX<\/span><\/strong><\/a>, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th<\/sup> District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. 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<\/strong> NoMoreFakeNews emails here<\/span><\/strong><\/a> or his free<\/strong> OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here<\/span><\/strong><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Source<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Dr. Allen Frances headed up the project to write the 1994 edition of the psychiatric bible, the DSM-IV. Long after it was printed he was quoted as saying: \u201cThere is no definition of a mental disorder. It\u2019s bullshit. I mean, you just can\u2019t define it.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":39260,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[61,22],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-207970","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-Commentary","category-Health"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/207970","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/39260"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=207970"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/207970\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":207975,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/207970\/revisions\/207975"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=207970"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=207970"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=207970"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}