In his article in Lancet Psychiatry, “Drug development in psychiatry: 50 years of failure and how to resuscitate it,” leading UK psychiatrist, David Nutt, inadvertently kills his own specialty. As I show in my commentary, Nutt puts the blame for psychiatry’s failure outside psychiatry. He propagates the lie about the chemical imbalance causing psychiatric disorders and when he speaks about “anti-psychiatry lobby groups,” he includes psychiatrist Joanna Moncrieff who showed three years ago that the chemical imbalance is an emperor without clothes. We have never heard of “anti-cardiology” lobby groups, have we?

Nutt suggests more of the same: drugs. A popular definition of madness is doing the same thing again and again expecting a different result. In my paper, “Are Psychiatrists More Mad Than Their Patients?” I argue that they are.

There are clear elements of cognitive dissonance in Nutt’s article. There is none so blind as he or she who WILL NOT SEE, and Nutt ends his article with a series of statements that disagree with the facts. He provides the strongest testament to the total failure of biological psychiatry and self-inflicted blindness among its leaders I have ever seen.

SHARE THIS ON:

These are the first four paragraphs in my autobiography:

HC Andersen’s fairy tale, The emperor’s new clothes, is my favourite, as it illustrates so well what most of the healthcare literature is about: deception. The authorities are often willing to lie about the evidence and they continue lying when you point this out to them, as authorities can never be wrong, right?

If you document that the emperor has no clothes, and you threaten financial, guild or political interests, you might be exposed to primitive and mendacious attacks, including attempts at character assassination, and you might be fired. My life as a whistleblower illustrates these elements. I was fired even though I had saved many lives and billions in healthcare expenditure. My book is a horror story about a healthcare that is focused on power and money, and on torturing the data till they confess.

I was an explorer and a pioneer and often came in trouble only because I was the first to demonstrate that the emperor had no clothes.

It never occurred to me that I should write an autobiography, but when historian, and one of Denmark’s best documentary filmmakers, Janus Bang from Fredericia, declared in November 2023 at an early breakfast in Stanford, when we were both severely jetlagged, that he wanted to write a historical biography about me, I had no choice. There was so much he would not know about if I didn’t write it down first.

You can download my book for free under Books.

The nauseating political correctness has now also crept into surveys about how to do good research even though extremely rare gender issues have absolutely nothing to do with this. The misguided signals of tolerance and inclusivity has been caused by the deplorable activism of a small minority of highly vocal, aggressive and intolerant people who do not identify themselves as a woman or a man. See my article.

When Kirsten Tolstrup, cardiologist and professor at the University of California San Francisco, spoke about the COVID-19 vaccines in an interview in Ugeskrift for Læger (Journal of the Danish Medical Association), she accused the US Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., of blatant lies. The one who lied was Tolstrup.

Why did people go crazy over face masks when they don’t seem to work? In Denmark, you could stroll along a golf course without a mask if you weren’t playing golf, but if you were a golfer, a face mask was obligatory. I was ordered to wear a face mask if I played badminton but not if I played tennis because the tennis director was more reasonable than his colleague. Read my article about the insanity.

My book will be published on 19 August by Skyhorse in New York (288 pages). It can be pre-ordered here.

Book description

This is a story of scientific misconduct, committed by Merck, the fourth biggest drug company in the world. Merck has committed scientific misconduct before, and the author describes the fraud related to Merck’s arthritis drug, Vioxx, which killed tens of thousands of patients because Merck concealed that it causes heart attacks.

In his role as an expert witness in a lawsuit against Merck, Dr. Peter C. Gøtzsche read 112,452 pages of confidential study reports about Merck’s HPV vaccine Gardasil, corresponding to 500 medium-sized books, and wrote an expert report of 350 pages with four appendices. Dr. Gøtzsche reveals that Merck used numerous tactics to avoid reporting serious neurological harms of Gardasil, including Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS) and Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS), which, in his view, in some cases constituted outright fraud.

How Merck and Drug Regulators Hid Serious Harms of the HPV Vaccines details how the drug agencies were complicit in scientific misconduct and gives many examples that other authorities also provided seriously misleading information about the benefits and harms of the HPV vaccines.

Dr. Gøtzsche gives a rare insight into the behavior of drug company lawyers when a company comes under attack for having concealed serious harms of its drug. He describes how he was harassed by Merck’s lawyer who tried to impugn his character and scientific credibility in ways, which included setting up traps for him during his deposition. If anyone was in doubt whether Merck and our authorities can be trusted, this book gives the answer.

Peter C. Gøtzsche Is professor emeritus, physician, and a bestselling book author. His scientific works have been cited over 190,000 times. He is the only Dane who has published over 100 papers in “the big five” journals (BMJ, Lancet, JAMA, Annals of Internal Medicine, and New England Journal of Medicine). He has also appeared on The Daily Show. He currently works as a researcher, lecturer, author, independent consultant, expert witness in lawsuits, and produces films and interviews, in collaboration with Danish award-winning filmmaker and historian Janus Bang.

By Martin Hemberger
Diplom Wirtschaftsinformatiker (FH)
Würzburg, Germany

A dangerous misconception, deeply embedded in psychiatry, is that the return of symptoms after discontinuing psychiatric medication is a relapse of the original condition. For many patiens, including me, this belief has led to misdiagnosis, suffering, and unnecessary, prolonged exposure to harmful drugs. What psychiatry labels as “relapse” is almost always a physiological response to the cessation of a substance that has altered brain functions. Read full article

In 2003, Tim, known to most as Woody, died of a sertraline-induced suicide at age 37. He was not depressed, nor did he have any history of mental illness. He died after taking the drug for five weeks with the dosage being doubled shortly before his death. He was given the antidepressant by his general physician for “insomnia.”

Woody loved life and all that this world has to offer. He had endless energy, a constant smile and truly cared for others. He had a successful career in sales and was active in the community, socially and politically, always willing to fight against injustice. Woody truly inspired others to be the best they could be.

Woody went to his regular internist because he was having trouble sleeping, in part because he had just started a new position as vice president of sales with a start-up company about two months earlier. He was excited about this dream opportunity to make his mark on the business world. Along with this excitement came some stress and difficulty sleeping.

This was the first time he’d ever gone to a doctor for this sort of issue. Woody’s doctor gave him three weeks’ worth of sertraline samples and told him to come back for a follow-up appointment after the samples were finished. There was no discussion about the risks or the need to be closely monitored because of this mind-altering drug. The first three weeks Woody was taking sertraline his wife was out of the country on business and no one was monitoring him. Within a couple of days, he experienced many of the known side effects of sertraline, e.g. night sweats, diarrhoea, trembling hands, and worsened anxiety.

One of the most significant side effects Woody had was akathisia. He was very restless, which caused him not to sleep, and irritable and felt he always needed to keep moving.

Shortly before his death, Woody came home crying after driving around all day. He sat in a foetal position on the kitchen floor profusely sweating with his hands pressing around his head saying, “Help me. Help me. I don’t know what’s happening to me. I am losing my mind. It’s like my head is outside my body looking in.” The next day, Woody called his doctor to tell him what happened and was told to be patient because it could take four to six weeks before the drug worked.

Over the course of the next week, in typical Woody fashion, he was looking for ways to “beat this feeling in my head all while still running three to four miles a day. Two weeks later, when sertraline should have worked according to his doctor, Woody was found hanging from the rafters in the garage. Woody’s family and friends only wish they knew then what they know now. It wasn’t Woody’s head. It was the drug.

Never once did Kim, Woody’s wife, or Woody question the drug. Why would they? It was FDA approved, heavily promoted as safe and effective, and it was given by his doctor. People trust their doctors, who assume the FDA and the drug companies did their job to ensure that the drugs they prescribe are safe and effective.

The day Woody died, the front page of the local newspaper had an article that people in the UK had found a link between antidepressants and suicide in teens. Kim’s quest for the truth has led her to testify about the dangers of SSRIs at hearings in the US Senate, at the FDA, the Health Department, Congress and the courts. Together with other campaigners, she was active in getting black box warnings added to antidepressants.

(First published in my book, Deadly Psychiatry and Organised Denial)

Cecily Bostock was a musician, an artist, an over-achiever in almost everything she did. She was having a lot of trouble sleeping, had racing thoughts, was over-analysing, and was overly sensitive. This prompted a prescription of paroxetine.

Her mother Sara said that within three weeks of taking Seroxat, Cecily became a totally different person.

“The last two days she was just a complete zombie I have to say. She was just agitated, jumping at every noise and not making sense. I was very concerned. We were very close to Cecily. I just loved her deeply.”

Sara found her daughter lying on the kitchen floor. There was a large chef’s knife on the floor by her and just a trickle of blood from her chest. Cecily had stabbed herself twice through the heart. Her autopsy revealed she had a very high blood level of paroxetine, which reflects poor metabolisation and is a feature common to many of these suicides.

Cecily killed herself about 20 days after she had started taking Seroxat. She was just 25 years old.

Since her daughter’s death, Sara has been campaigning and creating awareness about the dangers of antidepressants. She spoke at a charity conference in 2008 about her experience and knowledge from years of research, which is on video (http://vimeo. com/16727219). Sara has also given testimony at an FDA hearing and has co-founded www.ssristories.com, which is a collection of over 5,000 stories that have appeared in the media.

(First published in my book, Deadly Psychiatry and Organised Denial)

Candace was a happy 12-year-old girl who had never been depressed or had suicidal ideation. She was prescribed sertraline because she suffered from school anxiety. Her mother Mathy found her beautiful little girl hanging, her knees drawn up. Her father knew the minute he saw her that it was too late but tried to administer CPR, which continued for another 45 minutes at the hospital but in vain.

“Do you know what that’s like, to see your happy little girl hanging? There was no note, no warning, not for her, not for us.”

When Candace entered middle school, she began having problems on tests and frustration over certain homework assignments. She would block on answers she knew on tests, or write so illegibly that some answers were marked incorrect, even if she had them correct. Because of her parents’ concern, she saw her paediatrician, who recommended that she see a child psychiatrist. He immediately wanted to give her sertraline. Mathy was opposed, but he reassured her that it was safe and that he would recheck her in three weeks. After three weeks, he wanted to double the dose, from 12.5 mg to 25 mg, which Mathy opposed. Because of her vehemence, the medication was not increased at that time.

Right before school started following summer vacation, Mathy and Candace returned to the child psychiatrist, who once again wanted to increase the dose. When Mathy voiced concern, he stated, “What are you worried about? Kids take 100-200 mg of Zoloft a day without any problems.”

“Why was so much hidden from us? Why were we not ever informed about the contraindications or adverse reactions of Zoloft, or for that matter, antidepressants in children? Didn’t we have the right to be informed? … Shouldn’t it have been our choice to place Candace on medications that involved risk rather than the pharmaceutical companies or the FDA?”

Candace had many friends. Everybody loved her and when she died, more than a thousand people attended her service. Candace was everybody’s little girl, and if it could happen to her, it could happen to anyone’s child.

After Candace’s death, the Downings became aware that an abrupt withdrawal from an antidepressant can prove fatal, as it can create psychotic states, with decreased powers of reasoning. No one ever told them that their daughter was going in and out of psychotic states and needed to be watched closely every second.

“If we had been able to make our own choices, if we had been aware of the risks, this would never have happened, as we would never have allowed Candace to be placed on such a risky and controversial medication,” said Andrew Downing.

“What happened to our daughter and so many others like her is a travesty. We have since met other families who have lost their child after Zoloft was prescribed for test anxiety. Those in a position to create positive change can go home to their children at night. We will never have that opportunity with Candace again. Our therapist referred to what happened to Candace as abduction. She was taken away from us with no warning and died in the process. What gave them that right?” Mathy stated tearfully. 

The Downings, and other families, charge that drug makers knew from premarketing studies that these drugs made some children and teens suicidal but hid the study results.

“This is about the right of the American people to make their own decisions. I can’t sit back as an American citizen and watch children continue to die. And that is why we hope the documentary “Prescription: Suicide?” will help to get that message out where it counts: among the American families whose biggest concern is to protect and nurture their children,” said Mathy.

The Downings have testified at FDA hearings and are lobbying Congress to make all research public. Mathy has also addressed the US Drug Safety Systems Committee, which is reviewing the numerous allegations against the FDA’s inadequate handling of policy regarding antidepressants.

The Downings’ psychiatrist had not told them that he was on Pfizer payroll making speeches touting Zoloft. Pfizer said in a statement for CBS News that “it’s paid consulting work with doctors helps the company learn how to reduce adverse reactions.” No condolences were apparently offered.

People have called the Downings and said that because of Candace their child is alive, as they knew what to look for.

(First published in my book, Deadly Psychiatry and Organised Denial)