Captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger became a household name last January 15th when he landed U.S. Airlines flight 1549 safely in the Hudson River despite losing power minutes after takeoff. All 155 passengers and crew, including a baby, were saved. The man known as “Sully” became an instant hero.
The year ended with another airline story. This time there was another hero, an unlikely passenger by the name of Jasper Schuringa. The Dutch passenger jumped on “Underwear Bomber”, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, after the 23-year-old student allegedly tried to detonate explosives he had hidden in his crotch, as Northwest Airlines flight 253 was on its descent into Detroit. The 289 passengers and crew were safe, although shaken up.
The media jumped on the “Underwear Bomber” story, making it the biggest story of 2009. Of course, that's because the Christmas Day incident was the last major story of the decade. It didn't hurt that after a few days of waffling on the subject, the Obama Administration admitted lapses in national security.
President Obama blamed “human and systemic” failures for the terror attempt. Then Dick Cheney burst back onto the scene and blamed Obama for “pretending we are not at war.” It should be noted that Obama just sent 30,000 troops to Afghanistan and the U.S. military has taken out more terrorists in 2009 with unmanned Predator drones and other strikes than in any year of the Bush Administration.
The fact that the Nigerian “Underwear Bomber” was trained in Yemen and was on a terrorist watch list (but not on the no-fly list) is a little unnerving. Also troubling is that his actions should have set off alarms at the two airport checkpoints prior to entering the U.S. He paid $3,000 cash, had no luggage, and was dressed for a trip to Southern California, not Detroit. I'm not saying that we should use racial profiling, but it seems odd that the guy wasn't pulled aside at any checkpoint.
More troubling in the discussion of airplane security is the fact that it is up to the public, and not trained law enforcement, to be in charge of apprehending suspects. The near-disaster brought back memories of 9/11, when passengers joined together to foil one airliner from reaching its destination, the White House. They all died, but they died as heroes.
What is the head of the Transportation Security Administration doing to prevent further attacks? Nothing, because the TSA is still waiting for leadership as the Republican party has blocked President Obama's nomination, former FBI agent and security expert Erroll Southers. The TSA is an important part of national security and has been politicized to the point of having no power to do anything. The Republicans are blaming Obama for taking too long to appoint someone to fill the post. Obama nominated Southers in September. South Carolina Republican Jim DeMint has been the major obstacle to nominating a TSA chief. The TSA is the division of Homeland Security that oversees airport security, but DeMint is concerned that Southers might let TSA screeners join a labor union. DeMint called the failed bombing attempt a “perfect example of why the Obama Administration should not unionize the TSA.” He claims unionization of TSA workers would give the “union bosses” the power “to veto or delay future security improvements at our airports.”
In between airline stories, there were other highlights in 2009. The historic inauguration of Obama, on a cold day in January, brought more than a million people to the National Mall in Washington D.C., to witness the swearing in of the 44th President of the United States. “We must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America,” Obama said in his inaugural address. It may not be all that original, but Obama's oratorical skills made it possibly the sound bite of the year, except, of course, for the unusual breach of Congressional decorum when Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) shouted “You lie!” during a speech to Congress in September. Wilson blurted out his famous line immediately after Obama said, “There are those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal aliens. This too, is false. The reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.” So much for health care reform.
The economy went from bad to worse to a little better. Sarah Palin cashed in on her memoir “Going Rogue” as most Americans were going broke. President Obama continued Bush's policies of bailing out failed banks and the auto industry. The swine flu, renamed H1N1, was deemed a major pandemic, but most of us are still waiting to see what all the hype was about. As the news media were fixated on two wars and a cratering economy, a little political scandal seemed to come as a breather.
Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina, a Republican, saw his presidential ambitions go up in smoke as he made national news by disappearing after telling aides he was going for a hike on the Appalachian Trail on June 18th. He surfaced six days later, saying that he actually had been in Argentina “with his soul mate.” The media went wild... Until Michael Jackson died a few days later.
The news of Michael Jackson's untimely death at the age of 50 caught the media by surprise, but they stayed with the story, even delving into Anderson Cooper's discovery of Jackson's old friend Bubbles the Chimp, whom he dressed in matching clothes and taught to do the “moonwalk”. Bubbles has been found living in retirement in Florida.
From “Balloon Boy” to Tiger Woods, pop culture news gave Americans a respite from the actual horrors of two wars and the global economic catastrophe. Carrie Prejean went from first runner-up in the Miss USA 2009 beauty pageant to media star when she famously objected to same-sex marriage in favor of “opposite marriage”.
While we've all been trying to figure out how our government gets anything done, as the health care reform bill passed in the House and got torn apart in the Senate, President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize, and everyone scratched their heads wondering why.
As the symbol of economic excess, Bernie Madoff, is serving 150 years for bilking investors of millions of dollars, the economy is slowly making its way back. Cash For Clunkers was supposed to be a much-needed boost to the auto industry, but overall sales fell over 25%. General Motors and Chrysler filed for bankruptcy protection.
After hijacking the news media for much of the year, the Michael Jackson story ended on a fitting note. As the year wrapped up, it was announced that the “Thriller” video has been added to the film archives of the Library of Congress, the first music video to be so honored.
“And that's the way it was...”
-Walter Cronkite (1916-2009)
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Chapter Three
Elvin Perelli walked out the front door to look at his new car. Elvin was very proud of his investment, a bright, shiny Lexus with a leather interior...with a lease that in about a year-and-a-half he wouldn't be able to afford. But for now, he was happy with his life: new house, new car, new wife, and twins on the way. A two-car garage was his boyhood dream. And he was in the “business” -- location manager for the hit Saturday morning kids' show “Fillmore High School, U.S.A.”. Now he had it all.
Things change. People change. But 250 pounds is a lot for a 5-foot-4 Jewish schmuck from Encino to carry around. At 45, his doctor told him to lose about 100 pounds and quit smoking, or he only had about six months of quality life to look forward to.
“How about a triple bypass, emphysema, lung cancer, and an aneurysm -- most likely resulting in a coma,” said Dr. Sanderson, the cardiologist.
“Sure. That's easy for you to say. You're making six hundred dollars an hour,” said Elvin.
“In my professional opinion, money has nothing to do with it,” the doctor replied.
“Stick the money up your ass. And your 2008 Jaguar XKR Convertible, too,” said the fat man.
“Take two aspirin, and call me in three months,” came the reply.
Back on the home front, Melissa was baking cookies and whistling “The Sound of Music”, while Jerry Springer was scolding a guest in the background. The sounds of children playing next door gave the happy housewife a sense of community. Ten years younger than her husband, she was just happy to be married. Her looks left a little to be desired, if you get the picture, and she wasn't a hundred percent upstairs. But she got her man, Elvin Perelli, all 250 pounds of him. And she wanted to have those cookies ready when he arrived...which would be any minute.
Guess what? A brand new Lexus just pulled into the driveway, screeching to a halt. Mrs. Perelli looked out the window and saw Elvin squeeze out of the driver side. She smiled. She was living the American dream.
Things change. People change. But 250 pounds is a lot for a 5-foot-4 Jewish schmuck from Encino to carry around. At 45, his doctor told him to lose about 100 pounds and quit smoking, or he only had about six months of quality life to look forward to.
“How about a triple bypass, emphysema, lung cancer, and an aneurysm -- most likely resulting in a coma,” said Dr. Sanderson, the cardiologist.
“Sure. That's easy for you to say. You're making six hundred dollars an hour,” said Elvin.
“In my professional opinion, money has nothing to do with it,” the doctor replied.
“Stick the money up your ass. And your 2008 Jaguar XKR Convertible, too,” said the fat man.
“Take two aspirin, and call me in three months,” came the reply.
Back on the home front, Melissa was baking cookies and whistling “The Sound of Music”, while Jerry Springer was scolding a guest in the background. The sounds of children playing next door gave the happy housewife a sense of community. Ten years younger than her husband, she was just happy to be married. Her looks left a little to be desired, if you get the picture, and she wasn't a hundred percent upstairs. But she got her man, Elvin Perelli, all 250 pounds of him. And she wanted to have those cookies ready when he arrived...which would be any minute.
Guess what? A brand new Lexus just pulled into the driveway, screeching to a halt. Mrs. Perelli looked out the window and saw Elvin squeeze out of the driver side. She smiled. She was living the American dream.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Short Stories
The tall, gray-haired man in the tan trench coat made his way up the elevator and stopped at the fourth floor. The receptionist said "hello". The man didn't look up. Something was wrong. He didn't belong there. It was clear by his demeanor.
An uneasy silence came over the room. All the people looked downward, trying to avoid eye contact. Then the man pulled out a shotgun and killed everyone in the room.
To be continued...
A lot of people have been wondering what I've been up to lately. I'm writing a light-hearted book of short stories about life in the San Fernando Valley, the area known for tract homes laid out on asphalt grids which make up part of the northern edge of Los Angeles, where the smog settles in like cheap hairspray and you can fry an egg on the streets during the summer.
My blog disappeared for longer than I had anticipated, as I realized that I didn't enjoy writing every day, and instead preferred to sit around the house eating Cheez Doodles and watching "Law and Order" reruns.
I did find the time to finish my third screenplay, written with my friend and colleague Vincent Blanco. I'm trying to get financing for my current script, a low-to-mid-budget romantic comedy, but the economic climate isn't so good right now. There is some hope, however.
"The age of movie stars is over," according to this week's Time magazine. The stars just aren't needed any more to sell a movie. The comedy "The Hangover" was a hit, but with no stars it cost just $35 million, yet grossed $270 million domestically.
I remember when $35 million was a lot of money. I figure I can produce my movie for under $35 million, especially when washed-up stars like Christian Slater become available, or if Dylan McDermott wants to work during his hiatus from the cable TV series "Dark Blue". My first choice, Mario Lopez, was turned down by my co-producers because he can't play Jewish.
It's apparent that my daily blog is no more. I will, however, be writing one or two articles a week about anything that pops into my head. My days as a journalist, from my stint as the obituary writer at The Los Angeles Daily News, to my controversial work as an op-ed writer at DigitalJournal.com, are apparently over. What's left is a life free of obligations and a new start as a writer of important works. In addition, my new title of executive producer means that I'm only a little over $34 million short of financing for my movie.
I'm tired of waiting for Christian Slater to return my call. I've decided on Shia LaBeouf. Oh well...There goes my budget.
An uneasy silence came over the room. All the people looked downward, trying to avoid eye contact. Then the man pulled out a shotgun and killed everyone in the room.
To be continued...
A lot of people have been wondering what I've been up to lately. I'm writing a light-hearted book of short stories about life in the San Fernando Valley, the area known for tract homes laid out on asphalt grids which make up part of the northern edge of Los Angeles, where the smog settles in like cheap hairspray and you can fry an egg on the streets during the summer.
My blog disappeared for longer than I had anticipated, as I realized that I didn't enjoy writing every day, and instead preferred to sit around the house eating Cheez Doodles and watching "Law and Order" reruns.
I did find the time to finish my third screenplay, written with my friend and colleague Vincent Blanco. I'm trying to get financing for my current script, a low-to-mid-budget romantic comedy, but the economic climate isn't so good right now. There is some hope, however.
"The age of movie stars is over," according to this week's Time magazine. The stars just aren't needed any more to sell a movie. The comedy "The Hangover" was a hit, but with no stars it cost just $35 million, yet grossed $270 million domestically.
I remember when $35 million was a lot of money. I figure I can produce my movie for under $35 million, especially when washed-up stars like Christian Slater become available, or if Dylan McDermott wants to work during his hiatus from the cable TV series "Dark Blue". My first choice, Mario Lopez, was turned down by my co-producers because he can't play Jewish.
It's apparent that my daily blog is no more. I will, however, be writing one or two articles a week about anything that pops into my head. My days as a journalist, from my stint as the obituary writer at The Los Angeles Daily News, to my controversial work as an op-ed writer at DigitalJournal.com, are apparently over. What's left is a life free of obligations and a new start as a writer of important works. In addition, my new title of executive producer means that I'm only a little over $34 million short of financing for my movie.
I'm tired of waiting for Christian Slater to return my call. I've decided on Shia LaBeouf. Oh well...There goes my budget.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Paul Solomon Takes His Annual Summer Break
There is no perfect crime. We live in an imperfect world. But Gerald Applethorpe thought he could come close (but not too close, or there'd be no story).
A gun would be too obvious; an axe too uncommon for contemporary mayhem. No, it would be something easily available, perhaps a shovel. A large one. The gardener comes on Thursday.
So begins my novel.
I will be taking my annual summer break from writing this blog. For the next two weeks I will be working on my other writing projects.
In addition to my novel, I'm currently working on a rewrite of a screenplay with my writing partner Vincent Blanco. I can't disclose the details of it right now, other than the fact that it's a romantic comedy set in the worlds of advertising and coffeehouses. It will be low budget, similar to all the crap that Tyler Perry puts out, only funnier - and with Jewish people. Don't expect any car chases or explosions. Here's a rundown of my other projects:
I’m producing a reality show that I hope will be picked up for the 2009-2010 season. Because the television networks have been cutting costs, I’m putting my detective show on hold. All the networks have passed on my crime show about an alcoholic bipolar homicide detective and his sexy young female partner who work the streets of South Central L.A. looking for murdered tourists. Even filming in Vancouver would be too expensive, so even though CBS likes the pilot script, it’s just too expensive to film, especially if I get my first choice, Christian Slater, who commands a high salary. ABC was initially interested. They wanted Pauly Shore for the lead, but he wanted too much money and his own trailer, so they passed.
It’s all about the budget, so that’s why I’m switching to reality shows. I’m pitching my new show, called “Dumb Factor,” a remake of “Fear Factor,” which ran on NBC from 2001-2006. For $5,000, contestants will bungee-jump off a freeway overpass with an extremely frayed rope. The cars will run over the contestants until someone is stupid enough to get out and help, also getting splattered onto the pavement in slow-motion. This scenario will keep repeating until the commercial break. All that we’ll see after the commercial will be a bunch of dead bodies and a massive pile-up of Camrys. The winners will now compete for the second stunt, jumping out of an airplane with a placebo parachute, after which an Internet poll will be taken for the viewer to guess the winner. For those wanting to be a contestant, sign-ups will be on our website at www.stupididiot.com . This show will be perfect for ABC’s schedule, because they’re in the process of cancelling all scripted shows.
As you can see, I have a very busy schedule. When I return from my break, this blog will run once a week instead of every day, so that I can devote time to my other projects. I look forward to your comments and feedback on my articles.
Thank you for the unprecedented support for my blog. Many readers have asked for more information about me. I graduated from Hudson University in New York with a B.A. in criminal justice. I started my writing career at the Los Angeles Daily News where I honed my skills writing obituaries and getting coffee for the city desk editor. I was fired for making fliers for my band on the company copying machine.
After many years in the music business playing trumpet and keyboards, I quit to work full time as a freelance journalist. After that, I became a consultant and news commentator. I then took off a year to try to sell my television scripts and reality show ideas. Now I'm concentrating on my screenwriting career. The media can contact me through my representatives.
A gun would be too obvious; an axe too uncommon for contemporary mayhem. No, it would be something easily available, perhaps a shovel. A large one. The gardener comes on Thursday.
So begins my novel.
I will be taking my annual summer break from writing this blog. For the next two weeks I will be working on my other writing projects.
In addition to my novel, I'm currently working on a rewrite of a screenplay with my writing partner Vincent Blanco. I can't disclose the details of it right now, other than the fact that it's a romantic comedy set in the worlds of advertising and coffeehouses. It will be low budget, similar to all the crap that Tyler Perry puts out, only funnier - and with Jewish people. Don't expect any car chases or explosions. Here's a rundown of my other projects:
I’m producing a reality show that I hope will be picked up for the 2009-2010 season. Because the television networks have been cutting costs, I’m putting my detective show on hold. All the networks have passed on my crime show about an alcoholic bipolar homicide detective and his sexy young female partner who work the streets of South Central L.A. looking for murdered tourists. Even filming in Vancouver would be too expensive, so even though CBS likes the pilot script, it’s just too expensive to film, especially if I get my first choice, Christian Slater, who commands a high salary. ABC was initially interested. They wanted Pauly Shore for the lead, but he wanted too much money and his own trailer, so they passed.
It’s all about the budget, so that’s why I’m switching to reality shows. I’m pitching my new show, called “Dumb Factor,” a remake of “Fear Factor,” which ran on NBC from 2001-2006. For $5,000, contestants will bungee-jump off a freeway overpass with an extremely frayed rope. The cars will run over the contestants until someone is stupid enough to get out and help, also getting splattered onto the pavement in slow-motion. This scenario will keep repeating until the commercial break. All that we’ll see after the commercial will be a bunch of dead bodies and a massive pile-up of Camrys. The winners will now compete for the second stunt, jumping out of an airplane with a placebo parachute, after which an Internet poll will be taken for the viewer to guess the winner. For those wanting to be a contestant, sign-ups will be on our website at www.stupididiot.com . This show will be perfect for ABC’s schedule, because they’re in the process of cancelling all scripted shows.
As you can see, I have a very busy schedule. When I return from my break, this blog will run once a week instead of every day, so that I can devote time to my other projects. I look forward to your comments and feedback on my articles.
Thank you for the unprecedented support for my blog. Many readers have asked for more information about me. I graduated from Hudson University in New York with a B.A. in criminal justice. I started my writing career at the Los Angeles Daily News where I honed my skills writing obituaries and getting coffee for the city desk editor. I was fired for making fliers for my band on the company copying machine.
After many years in the music business playing trumpet and keyboards, I quit to work full time as a freelance journalist. After that, I became a consultant and news commentator. I then took off a year to try to sell my television scripts and reality show ideas. Now I'm concentrating on my screenwriting career. The media can contact me through my representatives.
Friday, July 17, 2009
Dr. Joseph Biederman Plays God With ADHD Meds
World-renowned Harvard child psychiatrist Joseph Biederman, whose work has helped fuel an explosion in the use of powerful antipsychotic drugs in children, has been caught up in controversy since a Congressional inquiry by Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) in 2008.
Biederman has been criticized for being an advocate of diagnosing Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and bipolar disorder in even the youngest of children, and using antipsychotic medicines to treat them. Pharmaceutical companies are continuing to profit from the sale of these powerful and sometimes unnecessary drugs. The problem was that much of Biederman's work was underwritten by drug makers for whom he was a private consultant. He was caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
The Congressional inquiry revealed last year that Biederman earned at least $1.6 million in consulting fees from drug makers from 2000 to 2007, but failed to report all but $200,000 to Harvard officials. This constituted a major conflict of interest.
Biederman appeared at a deposition on February 26, 2009, and was questioned by several lawyers for the states, who were claiming that makers of antipsychotic drugs defrauded state Medicaid programs by marketing their medicines improperly.
At the deposition, Biederman was asked what rank he held at Harvard.
"Full professor," he answered.
"What's after that?" asked Fletch Trammell, one of the attorneys.
"God," Biederman responded.
"Did you say God?" Trammell asked.
"Yeah," said Biederman, after which there was a moment of stunned silence.
The transcripts of this deposition call into question the mental state of the psychiatrist himself. It seems the good doctor is showing symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), which, according to the Mayo Clinic, is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance. They believe they are superior to others, but in reality, they are masking their own fragile self-esteem, and are vulnerable to the slightest criticism.
For decades, according to Bruce Levine in an article Friday in the Web site AlterNet.org, "the majority of American doctors, mental health professionals, the media, and the general public have yielded to the dissemination's of Harvard psychiatrist Joseph Biederman who successfully evangelized for more children - and younger children - to be medicated with powerful psychiatric drugs."
The "blowback," according to Levine, can be found in the July 2009 Scientific Mind article "Do ADHD Drugs Take a Toll on the Brain?" The article, by Edmund S. Higgins, clinical associate professor of family medicine and psychiatry at the Medical University of South Carolina, is a sobering report of the long-term dangers associated with ADHD drugs such as Ritalin, Concerta, Vyvanse, and Adderall.
In his article, Higgins cites the Centers for Disease Control. In a recent survey, the CDC found that ADHD afflicts about 5 percent of children in the U.S. - twice as many boys as girls - age 6 to 17. In 2005, according to the CDC, an estimated 9 percent of boys and 4 percent of girls were taking stimulant medications as part of their ADHD therapy. The majority of patients take Ritalin and Concerta, a methylphenidate, and the most of the rest are prescribed Adderall, an amphetamine.
In his article, Higgins writes "although it sounds counterintuitive to give stimulants to a person who is hyperactive, these drugs are thought to boost activity in the parts of the brain responsible for attention and self-control".
Higgins acknowledges that the ADHD medication can indeed improve attention, concentration and productivity and also suppress impulsive behavior. Significant improvements have been found in some people's lives.
Severe inattention and impulsive behavior can indeed put individuals at risk for crime and substance abuse, and adults can face unemployment and be susceptible to car accidents. In these instances, appropriate medication might keep a person out of prison, away from addictive drugs, or in a job. But over the last 15 years, doctors have been prescribing stimulants for people with moderate to mild inattention, and even some with a normal ability to focus.
Patients are no longer just taking medications in childhood, but are encouraged to stay on them when they become adults. Vyvanse, an amphetamine, and Concerta were introduced in 2008 by the FDA for treating adults, and pharmaceutical companies are pushing awareness of adult forms of ADHD. Students are taking the drugs to increase academic performance, and professionals such as doctors and lawyers are taking stimulants in hopes of boosting their productivity. These drugs have therefore become increasingly popular. According to a 2007 study, prescriptions for ADHD drugs in the methalphenidate and amphetamine categories rose by almost 12 percent per year between 2000 and 2005.
The increased usage of stimulants is causing questions to be raised about their long-term use. There is a growing concern that the drugs might take a toll on the brain in the long run. Methylphenidates such as Ritalin and Concerta have a chemical structure "similar to cocaine," according to Higgins, and they act on the brain in a similar way as cocaine.
According to Higgins: "Indeed, a smattering of recent studies, most of them involving animals, hint that stimulants would alter the structure and function of the brain in ways that may depress mood, boost anxiety, and, contrary to their short-term effects, lead to cognitive deficits. Human studies already indicate the medications can adversely affect areas of the brain that govern growth in children." He goes on to speculate as to what additional harmful side-effects have yet to be found.
In February 2007, the FDA did indeed issue warnings about the side-effects of ADHD drugs, such as stunted growth and psychosis, among other mental disorders. The possibility exists that stimulant treatment during childhood might contribute to high rates of accompanying diagnoses for other mental health problems, according to Higgins. But having ADHD is itself a risk factor for other mental health problems.
The evidence that ADHD drugs cause adverse reactions such as stunted growth in children are in direct contradiction to Biederman's findings. Alternet.org's Levine, himself a clinical psychologist, reports on a 2007 National Institute of Mental Health study of ADHD treatments involving 579 children. Over a three year period, the children, between seven and ten years old, were involved in a growth rate study. In the study, the growth rates of unmedicated children were compared to the growth rates of children who took ADHD stimulants throughout that period. Compared to the children who were unmedicated, the ADHD drug-treated children showed a decrease in growth rate of, on average, two fewer centimeters in height, and 2.7 kilograms less in weight. By the third year, there was no noticeable stunting of growth, but the damage had been done. The ADHD children never caught up to their counterparts.
According to Levine, "there are many children whose only problem in life is not doing their homework but are medicated with ADHD drugs; and the majority of their parents had no idea that they were giving their children amphetamines or amphetamine-like substances. Unfortunately, too many Americans are willing to surrender their own authority to damn near every pompous authoritarian rather than question the legitimacy of exploitive industrial complexes and the predatory people at the top of them."
The pharmaceutical-industrial complex, according to Levine, is part of a "wave of evil" that "washes not only the financial-industrial complex, the military-industrial complex, the energy-industrial complex, and predatory executives at AIG, Citibank, Halliburton, Blackwater/Xe, Enron, and Exxon."
Levine was quoting Ralph Waldo Emerson, who wrote: "The wave of evil washes all our institutions alike."
According to Levine, the pharmaceutical-industrial complex has "virtually annexed the mental health profession, whose all-star opportunist team is captained by Harvard psychiatrist Joseph Biederman."
Biederman, as I pointed out earlier, may be suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder. He has a "God complex" not unlike another well-known person associated with Harvard University, Theodore Kaczynski.
According to Wikipedia, Kaczynski, also known as the Unibomber, "is an American murderer, mathematician, and neo-Luddite social critic who carried out a campaign of mail bombings. He was born in Chicago, Illinois, where, as an intellectual child prodigy, he excelled academically from an early age. Kaczynski received an undergraduate degree from Harvard University and earned a PhD in mathematics from the University of Michigan. He became an assistant professor at the University of California, Berkeley at age 25 but resigned two years later." His occupation is listed as "prisoner, former assistant professor of mathematics." They left out "bomber".
While Wikipedia can sometimes be comical in its descriptions and anecdotes, the esteemed Psychology Today has referred to Kaczynski's acts of terror as being "narcissistic." It should be noted that Kaczynski suffers from a variety of other mental illnesses.
Joseph Biederman cannot be compared to Theodore Kaczynski, other than that they are both associated with Harvard, and both have a background in academics. Oh, and they both are suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
The problem with Biederman is that he has been held in such high regard for so long. His theories on mental illness have been disputed and shown to be dangerous. How many Ted Kaczynskis could have been stopped as children?
The June 22, 2009 issue of Time Magazine includes an article titled "Staying Sane," by John Cloud. He takes a look at the work of Dr. William McFarlane, who is one of the world's top authorities on preventing mental illness. He has long felt that forms of mental illness such as schizophrenia, from which Ted Kaszynski suffered, were preventable.
A team of UCLA researchers in the late 1970's began to publish the results of a long-term study called the UCLA Family Project. The study found that you could predict, with remarkable accuracy, which 16-year-old children would develop schizophrenia later in life.
The UCLA study found, after studying the kids for more than a decade, that those who became schizophrenic were most often from families that displayed "communication deviance," described as "unclear, unintelligible or fragmented speech." They also found the parenting to be "critical and intrusive."
Dr. McFarlane and others began working with some of the families to teach them to communicate better, with "less anger and intrusion". McFarlane was working on the assumption that schizophrenia could be prevented in asymptomatic kids who were at risk for the disease.
"Once a patient's perception of reality has cracked the first time, it becomes very hard to walk back to normality," Time Magazine's Cloud says of McFarlane's theory. Early detection is crucial, according to McFarlane.
McFarlane's schizophrenia-prevention ideas have given other researchers hope in more routine conditions, such as ADHD. Mental illness has long been linked to genes, over which we simply have no control. But according to many mental health experts like McFarlane, your environment and experiences have powerful effects on the way those genes are expressed. This is exactly the opposite of Harvard's Joseph Biederman.
If McFarlane is to be believed, and he has a large following, people like Ted Kaczynski are as much a product of their environment as they are their genes. Could Kaczynski have been stopped before he became ill? Probably not. But what about the millions of children who are having trouble focusing on their homework? Are drugs the answer? According to Biederman, yes. But after the February 2009 deposition when he compared himself to God (to be fair, he didn't say he was God, only that he was next in line), Biederman has lost all credibility. The fact that he failed to report $1.6 million in pharmaceutical consulting fees has been the subject of an ongoing Congressional investigation. His Harvard credentials are about as meaningful as the Unibomber's.
And one more thing: If you got through this article, you don't have ADHD.
Biederman has been criticized for being an advocate of diagnosing Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and bipolar disorder in even the youngest of children, and using antipsychotic medicines to treat them. Pharmaceutical companies are continuing to profit from the sale of these powerful and sometimes unnecessary drugs. The problem was that much of Biederman's work was underwritten by drug makers for whom he was a private consultant. He was caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
The Congressional inquiry revealed last year that Biederman earned at least $1.6 million in consulting fees from drug makers from 2000 to 2007, but failed to report all but $200,000 to Harvard officials. This constituted a major conflict of interest.
Biederman appeared at a deposition on February 26, 2009, and was questioned by several lawyers for the states, who were claiming that makers of antipsychotic drugs defrauded state Medicaid programs by marketing their medicines improperly.
At the deposition, Biederman was asked what rank he held at Harvard.
"Full professor," he answered.
"What's after that?" asked Fletch Trammell, one of the attorneys.
"God," Biederman responded.
"Did you say God?" Trammell asked.
"Yeah," said Biederman, after which there was a moment of stunned silence.
The transcripts of this deposition call into question the mental state of the psychiatrist himself. It seems the good doctor is showing symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), which, according to the Mayo Clinic, is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance. They believe they are superior to others, but in reality, they are masking their own fragile self-esteem, and are vulnerable to the slightest criticism.
For decades, according to Bruce Levine in an article Friday in the Web site AlterNet.org, "the majority of American doctors, mental health professionals, the media, and the general public have yielded to the dissemination's of Harvard psychiatrist Joseph Biederman who successfully evangelized for more children - and younger children - to be medicated with powerful psychiatric drugs."
The "blowback," according to Levine, can be found in the July 2009 Scientific Mind article "Do ADHD Drugs Take a Toll on the Brain?" The article, by Edmund S. Higgins, clinical associate professor of family medicine and psychiatry at the Medical University of South Carolina, is a sobering report of the long-term dangers associated with ADHD drugs such as Ritalin, Concerta, Vyvanse, and Adderall.
In his article, Higgins cites the Centers for Disease Control. In a recent survey, the CDC found that ADHD afflicts about 5 percent of children in the U.S. - twice as many boys as girls - age 6 to 17. In 2005, according to the CDC, an estimated 9 percent of boys and 4 percent of girls were taking stimulant medications as part of their ADHD therapy. The majority of patients take Ritalin and Concerta, a methylphenidate, and the most of the rest are prescribed Adderall, an amphetamine.
In his article, Higgins writes "although it sounds counterintuitive to give stimulants to a person who is hyperactive, these drugs are thought to boost activity in the parts of the brain responsible for attention and self-control".
Higgins acknowledges that the ADHD medication can indeed improve attention, concentration and productivity and also suppress impulsive behavior. Significant improvements have been found in some people's lives.
Severe inattention and impulsive behavior can indeed put individuals at risk for crime and substance abuse, and adults can face unemployment and be susceptible to car accidents. In these instances, appropriate medication might keep a person out of prison, away from addictive drugs, or in a job. But over the last 15 years, doctors have been prescribing stimulants for people with moderate to mild inattention, and even some with a normal ability to focus.
Patients are no longer just taking medications in childhood, but are encouraged to stay on them when they become adults. Vyvanse, an amphetamine, and Concerta were introduced in 2008 by the FDA for treating adults, and pharmaceutical companies are pushing awareness of adult forms of ADHD. Students are taking the drugs to increase academic performance, and professionals such as doctors and lawyers are taking stimulants in hopes of boosting their productivity. These drugs have therefore become increasingly popular. According to a 2007 study, prescriptions for ADHD drugs in the methalphenidate and amphetamine categories rose by almost 12 percent per year between 2000 and 2005.
The increased usage of stimulants is causing questions to be raised about their long-term use. There is a growing concern that the drugs might take a toll on the brain in the long run. Methylphenidates such as Ritalin and Concerta have a chemical structure "similar to cocaine," according to Higgins, and they act on the brain in a similar way as cocaine.
According to Higgins: "Indeed, a smattering of recent studies, most of them involving animals, hint that stimulants would alter the structure and function of the brain in ways that may depress mood, boost anxiety, and, contrary to their short-term effects, lead to cognitive deficits. Human studies already indicate the medications can adversely affect areas of the brain that govern growth in children." He goes on to speculate as to what additional harmful side-effects have yet to be found.
In February 2007, the FDA did indeed issue warnings about the side-effects of ADHD drugs, such as stunted growth and psychosis, among other mental disorders. The possibility exists that stimulant treatment during childhood might contribute to high rates of accompanying diagnoses for other mental health problems, according to Higgins. But having ADHD is itself a risk factor for other mental health problems.
The evidence that ADHD drugs cause adverse reactions such as stunted growth in children are in direct contradiction to Biederman's findings. Alternet.org's Levine, himself a clinical psychologist, reports on a 2007 National Institute of Mental Health study of ADHD treatments involving 579 children. Over a three year period, the children, between seven and ten years old, were involved in a growth rate study. In the study, the growth rates of unmedicated children were compared to the growth rates of children who took ADHD stimulants throughout that period. Compared to the children who were unmedicated, the ADHD drug-treated children showed a decrease in growth rate of, on average, two fewer centimeters in height, and 2.7 kilograms less in weight. By the third year, there was no noticeable stunting of growth, but the damage had been done. The ADHD children never caught up to their counterparts.
According to Levine, "there are many children whose only problem in life is not doing their homework but are medicated with ADHD drugs; and the majority of their parents had no idea that they were giving their children amphetamines or amphetamine-like substances. Unfortunately, too many Americans are willing to surrender their own authority to damn near every pompous authoritarian rather than question the legitimacy of exploitive industrial complexes and the predatory people at the top of them."
The pharmaceutical-industrial complex, according to Levine, is part of a "wave of evil" that "washes not only the financial-industrial complex, the military-industrial complex, the energy-industrial complex, and predatory executives at AIG, Citibank, Halliburton, Blackwater/Xe, Enron, and Exxon."
Levine was quoting Ralph Waldo Emerson, who wrote: "The wave of evil washes all our institutions alike."
According to Levine, the pharmaceutical-industrial complex has "virtually annexed the mental health profession, whose all-star opportunist team is captained by Harvard psychiatrist Joseph Biederman."
Biederman, as I pointed out earlier, may be suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder. He has a "God complex" not unlike another well-known person associated with Harvard University, Theodore Kaczynski.
According to Wikipedia, Kaczynski, also known as the Unibomber, "is an American murderer, mathematician, and neo-Luddite social critic who carried out a campaign of mail bombings. He was born in Chicago, Illinois, where, as an intellectual child prodigy, he excelled academically from an early age. Kaczynski received an undergraduate degree from Harvard University and earned a PhD in mathematics from the University of Michigan. He became an assistant professor at the University of California, Berkeley at age 25 but resigned two years later." His occupation is listed as "prisoner, former assistant professor of mathematics." They left out "bomber".
While Wikipedia can sometimes be comical in its descriptions and anecdotes, the esteemed Psychology Today has referred to Kaczynski's acts of terror as being "narcissistic." It should be noted that Kaczynski suffers from a variety of other mental illnesses.
Joseph Biederman cannot be compared to Theodore Kaczynski, other than that they are both associated with Harvard, and both have a background in academics. Oh, and they both are suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
The problem with Biederman is that he has been held in such high regard for so long. His theories on mental illness have been disputed and shown to be dangerous. How many Ted Kaczynskis could have been stopped as children?
The June 22, 2009 issue of Time Magazine includes an article titled "Staying Sane," by John Cloud. He takes a look at the work of Dr. William McFarlane, who is one of the world's top authorities on preventing mental illness. He has long felt that forms of mental illness such as schizophrenia, from which Ted Kaszynski suffered, were preventable.
A team of UCLA researchers in the late 1970's began to publish the results of a long-term study called the UCLA Family Project. The study found that you could predict, with remarkable accuracy, which 16-year-old children would develop schizophrenia later in life.
The UCLA study found, after studying the kids for more than a decade, that those who became schizophrenic were most often from families that displayed "communication deviance," described as "unclear, unintelligible or fragmented speech." They also found the parenting to be "critical and intrusive."
Dr. McFarlane and others began working with some of the families to teach them to communicate better, with "less anger and intrusion". McFarlane was working on the assumption that schizophrenia could be prevented in asymptomatic kids who were at risk for the disease.
"Once a patient's perception of reality has cracked the first time, it becomes very hard to walk back to normality," Time Magazine's Cloud says of McFarlane's theory. Early detection is crucial, according to McFarlane.
McFarlane's schizophrenia-prevention ideas have given other researchers hope in more routine conditions, such as ADHD. Mental illness has long been linked to genes, over which we simply have no control. But according to many mental health experts like McFarlane, your environment and experiences have powerful effects on the way those genes are expressed. This is exactly the opposite of Harvard's Joseph Biederman.
If McFarlane is to be believed, and he has a large following, people like Ted Kaczynski are as much a product of their environment as they are their genes. Could Kaczynski have been stopped before he became ill? Probably not. But what about the millions of children who are having trouble focusing on their homework? Are drugs the answer? According to Biederman, yes. But after the February 2009 deposition when he compared himself to God (to be fair, he didn't say he was God, only that he was next in line), Biederman has lost all credibility. The fact that he failed to report $1.6 million in pharmaceutical consulting fees has been the subject of an ongoing Congressional investigation. His Harvard credentials are about as meaningful as the Unibomber's.
And one more thing: If you got through this article, you don't have ADHD.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
CIA Assassination Squads? It Sounds Like The Movies
"It sounds great in movies, but when you try to do it, it's not that easy." That's what a former intelligence official told the New York Times on Tuesday about the CIA's canceled secret program that involved plans to send paramilitary teams around the world to assassinate top al-Qaeda leaders.
"The idea of CIA assassination teams evokes movie-style images of black-clad specialists climbing through windows to silently garrote their targets," Corey Flintoff wrote in Tuesday's NPR.org.
In reality, the question is: Can the CIA go after terrorists with impunity?
Although the program appears to have never been carried out, it remained secret, since its inception in 2001, even from Congress. That was until last month when CIA director Leon Panetta announced he was canceling it. The secret plan was in effect for so long because officials wanted a more precise way to kill terrorists than by drone aircraft missile strikes on suspected al-Qaeda sites, which frequently resulted in civilian casualties.
In 1976, after the disclosure that the CIA had plans to assassinate Fidel Castro, Gerald Ford's executive order on foreign intelligence activities explicitly prohibits "political assassination." That ban was aimed specifically at attempts on the lives of foreign leaders. Supporters of the 2001 plan argue that al-Qaeda leaders are no different than soldiers on a battlefield, making them legitimate targets.
According to the Geneva Conventions, it would be lawful for one uniformed soldier to kill another uniformed soldier. It would also be lawful, for a soldier, on the battlefield or operating a drone aircraft from afar, to target someone out of uniform who was participating in terrorist activities.
Is the United States technically at war with al-Qaeda? The way international law might apply to the secret 2001 program depends on this question. Would it be lawful for non soldiers such as CIA agents to engage in killing of any kind? The fact that they are not in uniforms could be interpreted as "feigning noncombatant status," which is a violation of the laws of war.
There is the long-held argument that the global war on terrorism is not a war in the legal sense, which would mean sending CIA operatives to kill terrorist suspects would be a military action against a private group. Juliet Lapidos, in an article in Tuesday's Slate.com, says this is "no different from sending the CIA to Italy to murder suspected members of the mafia, and a violation of the basic notions of state sovereignty."
Lapidos goes on to say that the argument can be made that if the CIA kills a terrorist in a foreign country, "it's kosher because it's a form of self-defense, where the 'self' in question is the United States of America. It doesn't matter whether the terrorist is currently engaged in fighting - only that he's a terrorist."
Targeted assassinations, according to the defenders of the secret CIA initiative, would be no different from what the United States is trying to accomplish with unmanned Predator drone missile attacks in Pakistan. President Obama has continued this Bush administration tactic.
The question remains: Should Congress have been briefed about the plan? Supporters of the plan say no, that the plan was simply not advanced enough to warrant notifying Congress. They point to the controversy that arose after Panetta briefed Congress on the program. The media attention and public discussion illustrates the danger of exposing a highly sensitive and secret program to the risk of congressional leaks.
The secret program never got off the ground, but since word leaked out about it, the discussion has continued. The question remains: What's the difference between assassinating someone with a missile and assassinating them with a handgun? That one's up for debate.
The whole idea of secret CIA assassination squads lurking in the shadows with terrorist leaders in their cross-hairs, wearing dark suits and smoking Marlboros, sure sounds like something out of a movie. Or maybe a comic book. The Geneva Conventions are taken about as seriously as Comic-Con.
"The idea of CIA assassination teams evokes movie-style images of black-clad specialists climbing through windows to silently garrote their targets," Corey Flintoff wrote in Tuesday's NPR.org.
In reality, the question is: Can the CIA go after terrorists with impunity?
Although the program appears to have never been carried out, it remained secret, since its inception in 2001, even from Congress. That was until last month when CIA director Leon Panetta announced he was canceling it. The secret plan was in effect for so long because officials wanted a more precise way to kill terrorists than by drone aircraft missile strikes on suspected al-Qaeda sites, which frequently resulted in civilian casualties.
In 1976, after the disclosure that the CIA had plans to assassinate Fidel Castro, Gerald Ford's executive order on foreign intelligence activities explicitly prohibits "political assassination." That ban was aimed specifically at attempts on the lives of foreign leaders. Supporters of the 2001 plan argue that al-Qaeda leaders are no different than soldiers on a battlefield, making them legitimate targets.
According to the Geneva Conventions, it would be lawful for one uniformed soldier to kill another uniformed soldier. It would also be lawful, for a soldier, on the battlefield or operating a drone aircraft from afar, to target someone out of uniform who was participating in terrorist activities.
Is the United States technically at war with al-Qaeda? The way international law might apply to the secret 2001 program depends on this question. Would it be lawful for non soldiers such as CIA agents to engage in killing of any kind? The fact that they are not in uniforms could be interpreted as "feigning noncombatant status," which is a violation of the laws of war.
There is the long-held argument that the global war on terrorism is not a war in the legal sense, which would mean sending CIA operatives to kill terrorist suspects would be a military action against a private group. Juliet Lapidos, in an article in Tuesday's Slate.com, says this is "no different from sending the CIA to Italy to murder suspected members of the mafia, and a violation of the basic notions of state sovereignty."
Lapidos goes on to say that the argument can be made that if the CIA kills a terrorist in a foreign country, "it's kosher because it's a form of self-defense, where the 'self' in question is the United States of America. It doesn't matter whether the terrorist is currently engaged in fighting - only that he's a terrorist."
Targeted assassinations, according to the defenders of the secret CIA initiative, would be no different from what the United States is trying to accomplish with unmanned Predator drone missile attacks in Pakistan. President Obama has continued this Bush administration tactic.
The question remains: Should Congress have been briefed about the plan? Supporters of the plan say no, that the plan was simply not advanced enough to warrant notifying Congress. They point to the controversy that arose after Panetta briefed Congress on the program. The media attention and public discussion illustrates the danger of exposing a highly sensitive and secret program to the risk of congressional leaks.
The secret program never got off the ground, but since word leaked out about it, the discussion has continued. The question remains: What's the difference between assassinating someone with a missile and assassinating them with a handgun? That one's up for debate.
The whole idea of secret CIA assassination squads lurking in the shadows with terrorist leaders in their cross-hairs, wearing dark suits and smoking Marlboros, sure sounds like something out of a movie. Or maybe a comic book. The Geneva Conventions are taken about as seriously as Comic-Con.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Ernie Johnson Weighs In On Joe Jackson
A few days after Michael Jackson died, his father Joe was smiling and waving to the crowds outside his Encino home while promoting his new record label. Now he's got a new act: "The Jackson 3". He's talking about Michael's kids.
On Monday, Joe Jackson, was interviewed by the UK's The Sun. The Paul Solomon article on Monday gave a rundown of the situation, and it elicited a strong response from our readers.
Below is a comment from our long-time reader Ernie Johnson, who doesn't pull any punches:
"How much longer do we have to endure the non-stop Michael Jackson circus? Yes, he was killed by a representative of the insurance company because he was worth more dead than alive. Yes, his father beat him as a child and that turned him into the pedophile freak that he became. Yes, he had a pet chimp, whom he taught to moon walk. Yes, he outbid Paul McCartney for the Beatles catalog. Yes, he had three kids who weren't biologically his (nor his "wife's"). So now you're telling us that ol' Joe is going to teach Paris, Prince, and little Blanket how to sing and dance, and beat them with a coat hanger until they learn their steps? Blah, blah, [expletive deleted] blah. Enough already! I'll wait until the movie comes out on Blu-ray".
No stranger to controversy, Ernie's stream-of-consciousness rant was in questionable taste, a fact that our readers either missed, or didn't want to comment on. Or maybe some of them agreed with Ernie. Is this what people are thinking but are afraid to say? There were other comments:
Our long-time reader and commentator Marc got the wrong Joe Jackson, but as is his style, he may have been trying to make a point: "I liked Joe Jackson much better when he was putting out edgy New Wave songs like 'Is She Really Going Out With Him' and 'Steppin' Out'. His new stuff really creeps me out," Marc said, referring to the singer of the same name, who hit his peak in the 1970s and 1980s.
Johnny G. responded to Marc: "I think what Marc is saying is that Joe Jackson the singer is getting a bad name from Joe Jackson the child-beater," he said, then got back on the real subject of today's what-the-heck-is-going-on news. "Michael's dad is making an idiot out of himself, and when I heard Joe's wife Katherine was getting custody, it made me wonder what was going on. Now I'm hearing that Joe is separated from his wife, so hopefully he won't be allowed to have anything with them. As for the 'Jackson 3', I don't see how anybody in charge of the kids' welfare would agree to this. But when you're talking about the amount of money to be made, anything can happen."
Don Powell said it best: "Joe Jackson should be kept as far away from these children as possible. He's a total nut case."
On Monday, Joe Jackson, was interviewed by the UK's The Sun. The Paul Solomon article on Monday gave a rundown of the situation, and it elicited a strong response from our readers.
Below is a comment from our long-time reader Ernie Johnson, who doesn't pull any punches:
"How much longer do we have to endure the non-stop Michael Jackson circus? Yes, he was killed by a representative of the insurance company because he was worth more dead than alive. Yes, his father beat him as a child and that turned him into the pedophile freak that he became. Yes, he had a pet chimp, whom he taught to moon walk. Yes, he outbid Paul McCartney for the Beatles catalog. Yes, he had three kids who weren't biologically his (nor his "wife's"). So now you're telling us that ol' Joe is going to teach Paris, Prince, and little Blanket how to sing and dance, and beat them with a coat hanger until they learn their steps? Blah, blah, [expletive deleted] blah. Enough already! I'll wait until the movie comes out on Blu-ray".
No stranger to controversy, Ernie's stream-of-consciousness rant was in questionable taste, a fact that our readers either missed, or didn't want to comment on. Or maybe some of them agreed with Ernie. Is this what people are thinking but are afraid to say? There were other comments:
Our long-time reader and commentator Marc got the wrong Joe Jackson, but as is his style, he may have been trying to make a point: "I liked Joe Jackson much better when he was putting out edgy New Wave songs like 'Is She Really Going Out With Him' and 'Steppin' Out'. His new stuff really creeps me out," Marc said, referring to the singer of the same name, who hit his peak in the 1970s and 1980s.
Johnny G. responded to Marc: "I think what Marc is saying is that Joe Jackson the singer is getting a bad name from Joe Jackson the child-beater," he said, then got back on the real subject of today's what-the-heck-is-going-on news. "Michael's dad is making an idiot out of himself, and when I heard Joe's wife Katherine was getting custody, it made me wonder what was going on. Now I'm hearing that Joe is separated from his wife, so hopefully he won't be allowed to have anything with them. As for the 'Jackson 3', I don't see how anybody in charge of the kids' welfare would agree to this. But when you're talking about the amount of money to be made, anything can happen."
Don Powell said it best: "Joe Jackson should be kept as far away from these children as possible. He's a total nut case."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
