51 deaths ADHD drugs ...

"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
vernon wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
vernon wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
vernon wrote:
Ilena wrote in message
...
P.net!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: "VERACARE"


Why has the FDA concealed from the public 51 deaths from ADHD drugs
until
now?

51 out of around 100,000 per year of miss-prescribed and errors is
quite insignificant.
You are mistaken in your interpretation of the numbers. The NY Times
reported that this was a study of five years of records, 1999 through
2003. The number of deaths is also incorrect.

"Twenty-five people died suddenly and 54 others suffered serious
unexplained heart problems while taking stimulant drugs like Ritalin
from 1999 through 2003, according to reports sent to federal drug
regulators."

Now, let's take a minute and analyze this. Twenty-five people died
over the course of 5 years. That averages to 5 deaths per year. The
NYTimes then reports that "...[a]bout 29 million prescriptions were
written in 2004 for Ritalin, Adderall and similar drugs to treat
attention deficit disorder and hyperactivity, most of them for
children."

Assume that the average prescription rate is *only* 25,000,000 per
year. Since these medications are Schedule II, which means that only a
one months supply can be written at a time, approximately 2,083,333
people per month are, on average, being prescribed these medications.

Assume that all 5 deaths happened in the same month, and you wind up
with a rate of 2.4000003840000614400098304015729e-6.

Compare that with the odds of being struck by lightening:

http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/medical.htm

My younger son attends a special school for physically handicapped
students. In the past three years, two classmates have died for no
apparent reason, the last being in December 2005. One of the kids in
my neighborhood died from running the bases. His father is a DDS and
was at the school at the time. He is trained in using a defibrillator
and could not resuscitate his son.

I would classify this report and just this side of relatively
meaningless.

That's what I said.
Yeah, but not as well as I did...

The numbers really do not add up very well.

Ever wonder about how many die of no apparent reason?
Like I pointed out in the paragraph above, yes, on three occasions in
the past 2 years. One boy rode the bus with my younger son and they hung
out together outside of school. He did not wake up one morning.

One boy was the captain of my son's school's wheelchair basketball team.
No arms and two underdeveloped legs. He used one to operate the joystick
on his power chair, and the other, the longer of the two, for dribbling,
stealing and shooting. His mother thought he was sleeping on the school
bus when he came home from school.

The third is a neighborhood kid who had just finished running the bases
and died.

From the little I have seen, it is sickening. Not a conspiracy, but
lack of involvement and laws to determine.
It is very shocking for parents to sudden lose a child who is in
apparent good medical health. Sadly, even on autopsy, the actual cause
of death cannot often be determined. I know in the two cases where I
know the families well, they still do not know what happened. Both boys,
having physical disabilities, had been carefully examined and monitored
over the years.

It is always pretty close to possible to determine cause if there is a
desire. I know parents have a desire, but seemingly are easy to be put
off with "We just don't know"

I know the medical examiners involved, and they ALWAYS have a desire with
kids.

Good. It's unusual.

In article , "Rich" writes:
Two tablets every four hours, assuming regular strength 325mg, is a safe
dose of acetaminophen for a patient with a healthy liver. The proper dosing
interval for ibuprofen is every six hours, so two tablets (OTC strength of
200mg) every four hours would probably be an overdose, and might cause
gastrointestinal problems.

The standard label dosing for ibuprofen is ONE tablet every 4-6 hours, not
two. The DO NOT EXCEED dose except under doctors orders is 6 in 24 hours.

Last year I had the doctor tell me to take 3 every 4-6 hours. I didn't take
them in the middle of the night, so I was doing 12-16 a day.

--
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)!
Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf
www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one
who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it
but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are
inevitably ruined. -- Patrick Henry, speech of June 5 1788

"Peter Bowditch wrote:
"JanD" wrote:


"Bob Kaplow" wrote in message
...
In article Ss8Hf.790990$xm3.430995@attbi_s21, "JanD"
writes:
Ritalin 'may cause damage to brains'

OK, now I think I understand your problem...

It is NOT *MY* problem!

It IS a huge problem.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/lifean...les/8211049?ve...


Ritalin 'may cause damage to brains'


By Pravin Char, Metro


17 December 2003


Children given Ritalin to control hyperactivity could be permanently brain
damaged, it was claimed yesterday.


Research suggests the controversial 'chemical cosh' drug

No need to read any further. The use of the idiotic expression "chemical
cosh" means that
it is perfectly safe to ...

snip bull****

Restored and MORE, what Peter can't handle:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/lifean...les/8211049?ve...


Ritalin 'may cause damage to brains'


By Pravin Char, Metro


17 December 2003


Children given Ritalin to control hyperactivity could be permanently brain
damaged, it was claimed yesterday.


Research suggests the controversial 'chemical cosh' drug raises the risk of
depression and anxiety in adulthood.


Ritalin alters the brain's chemical composition so that it has a lasting
effect
on mental health, US scientists believe. Because these changes take place
while
a child's brain is growing, they could cause irreversiblle damage


The findings will alarm parents using the drug to control a child's
attention
deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).


British GPs dispensed a record 254,000 Ritalin prescriptions last year, up
from
208,500 in 2001. One in 20 children is said to have ADHD, which makes them
boisterous and unfocused.


'It is vitally important we evaluate the long-term effects of these drugs,'
said Dr Nora Volkow, director of the US National Institute on Drug Abuse.


Although American studies involved laboratory rats, the doses given were
comparable to those used on children.


In one test, giving Ritalin to young, healthy rats increased the presence of
certain chemicals linked to depression in adults. Asecond study found higher
levels of stress hormones and anxietylike behaviours.


Last night, Shadow children's minister Tim Loughton urged the Government to
investigate Ritalin use.


The Royal College of Paediatrics said: 'Ritalin has been used for 40 years.
If
there was a long-term side-effect, it would have been discovered by now.'


Novartis, the company which makes Ritalin, insisted there was no clinical
link
to depression or anxiety disorders.



Now back to the subject.


http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/*lifea...es/8*211049?ve...


Again, I deleted the article. It is copyrighted; I don't have permission
to copy it.


Our brains change during development. Change is not the same as damage.
IMHO, it has not been shown that methylphenidate and other drugs that help
people with ADHD damage the brain.



That leads us right back where we started!

http://money.cnn.com/2005/07/0*1/news/fortune500/fda_panel.dj*/



Agency asked to proceed with plans for warnings about hallucinations,
suicide risk.
Good. I am glad that the FDA is paying attention to side effects.


Such a pity they did NOT do it BEFORE *organized medicine* decided to start
giving it to BABIES!!!!!!!!


I do concur that investigations of the long-term effects of the drugs
should be done.


Jeff



And, I do say:

Such a pity they did NOT do it BEFORE *organized medicine* decided to start
giving it to BABIES!!!!!!!!


GOOD GRIEF!


Then I back it up!


http://www.guardian.co.uk/life*/this...0439*0,00.html


Is it safe for children to take Ritalin?


David Adam
Thursday July 24, 2003
The Guardian


If not, then we're storing up a whole heap of trouble. New figures this week
show that use of the drug given to calm hyperactive children has soared
100-fold in Britain in the past decade. Doctors dispensed 254,000
prescriptions
of it last year, up from 2,000 or so given annually in the early 1990s.
Ritalin has been approved for use in children over five years old who suffer
from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), but many doctors
prescribe the drug - also known as methylphenidate - for children as young
as
18 months.


The drug is widely considered safe, but few long-term studies have been done
because of the ethical difficulties of experimenting with children. And some
scientists are concerned how the drug - a powerful stimulant shown to have a
similar effect to cocaine - could affect developing brains. One high profile
investigation in 2001 did suggest that Ritalin triggered changes to brain
function. But Joan Baizer, who led the research at Buffalo University, New
York
says its results were largely exaggerated. "It was a preliminary report on
basic research in rats _ it doesn't imply anything about a long-term health
effect," she says.


Dave Woodhouse, who runs an ADHD clinic at the University of Teesside says
some
evidence is emerging that children taking Ritalin for several years show
reduced cognitive ability, but this work is also at an early stage and has
not
yet been published.


A controversial three-year clinical trial of Ritalin use among hundreds of
preschool US youngsters diagnosed with ADHD is due to report next year. The
study is led by Laurence Greenhill of the New York State Psychiatric
Institute
and is the first to look at the effects of a drug on children as young as
three.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/life*/this...0439*0,00.html


Is it safe for children to take Ritalin?


David Adam
Thursday July 24, 2003
The Guardian


If not, then we're storing up a whole heap of trouble. New figures this week
show that use of the drug given to calm hyperactive children has soared
100-fold in Britain in the past decade. Doctors dispensed 254,000
prescriptions
of it last year, up from 2,000 or so given annually in the early 1990s.
Ritalin has been approved for use in children over five years old who suffer
from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), but many doctors
prescribe the drug - also known as methylphenidate - for children as young
as
18 months.


The drug is widely considered safe, but few long-term studies have been done
because of the ethical difficulties of experimenting with children. And some
scientists are concerned how the drug - a powerful stimulant shown to have a
similar effect to cocaine - could affect developing brains. One high profile
investigation in 2001 did suggest that Ritalin triggered changes to brain
function. But Joan Baizer, who led the research at Buffalo University, New
York
says its results were largely exaggerated. "It was a preliminary report on
basic research in rats _ it doesn't imply anything about a long-term health
effect," she says.


Dave Woodhouse, who runs an ADHD clinic at the University of Teesside says
some
evidence is emerging that children taking Ritalin for several years show
reduced cognitive ability, but this work is also at an early stage and has
not
yet been published.


A controversial three-year clinical trial of Ritalin use among hundreds of
preschool US youngsters diagnosed with ADHD is due to report next year. The
study is led by Laurence Greenhill of the New York State Psychiatric
Institute
and is the first to look at the effects of a drug on children as young as
three.


You also might be interested in the fact, preschoolers were sought for drug
studies, back in 2001.


http://tinyurl.com/2g575


As a ped doc, I am surprised you do NOT know this. Good thing I am here.


Jan
(this is a repost, if this links do not work, from here, they still do, as I
tried everyone of them, bleow is the tiny url where they were first posted)
http://tinyurl.com/b7qhf

http://www.bio-medical.com/adhd_0001.htm

PRESCHOOLERS ON PSYCH DRUGS

By: LEAH GINSBERG, HALLIE LEVINE, and MARILYN RAUBER

Alarmed by reports of a dramatic rise in the use of psychiatric drugs for
preschoolers, First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton yesterday weighed into the
debate about the use of the stimulant Ritalin.

She announced the development by the Food and Drug Administration of new
kiddie-dosage warning labels for the drugs and a $5 million federal study
into the use of Ritalin by preschoolers.

"We just don't know enough" about the effect of mind-altering drugs on young
children, the first lady said.

"I am no doctor, but I am a parent and I have been a longtime children's
advocate, and these findings concern me."

Clinton -- who briefly left the New York campaign trail to seize the White
House bully pulpit -- also announced a White House conference next fall on
child mental-health and said Uncle Sam will start distributing information
kits to doctors, parents and schools about Attention Deficit Disorder.

Many doctors welcomed Clinton's concern, although some questioned her
motives.

"I think if Hillary Clinton was not running for congress in New York, this
would be dealt with [differently]," said Mitchell Clionsky, the director of
Neuropsychology Associates and the ADD Center in Springfield, Mass.

While Clionsky agreed with the America Medical Association study that
there's been an acute increase (150 percent between 1990 and 1995) in the
number of preschoolers taking psychotropic drugs -- particularly Ritalin--he
said Washington has overreacted.

"[Ritalin] is not a great public health hazard, and it is very helpful for
many," he said. "If you want my opinion, it's turning it into something of a
cause celebre."

Doctors are divided on the subject.

Dr. Leon Zacharowicz, a child neurologist at Nassau County Medical Center in
East Meadow, L.I., said Ritalin is overprescribed and children are often
misdiagnosed with ADD.

"I've had parents tell me they were prescribed Ritalin within 30 minutes of
coming to their family doctor's office," he said.

Zacharowicz blamed a "fast-food approach" to medicine.

"The family's primary-care practitioner may be so harried with 30 screaming
patients with ear infections in the waiting room that he doesn't have time
to properly evaluate the child," he said.

Zacharowicz said doctors often prescribe Ritalin without delving into other
emotional issues that can affect a child's behavior.

"I saw a child recently who was being abused by a neighbor," he says.

"His teacher recommended he see me for Ritalin -- but the child was
irritable only at home, when his neighbor was around. If we hadn't [talked]
to him, that never would have gotten sorted out."

Even if a child is eventually diagnosed with ADD, Zacharowicz and other
doctors say there are other treatments that should be tried before drug
therapies.

Dr. Daniel Kuhn, a Manhattan neuropsychiatrist with St. Luke's-Roosevelt
Hospital, says he's had success with a technique known as neurofeedback,
similar to biofeedback.

Kuhn said studies have shown the treatment has a 70 percent success rate --
and none of the side effects of Ritalin.

"I'll put a child on Ritalin while starting him on neurobiofeedback. After a
while, we reduce the medicines and then stop them entirely. If the child's
ADD isn't severe, we don't need medicines at all."

Zacharowicz added that Ritalin has many potent side effects --including
seizures -- which can be deadly and that its use on the young hasn't been
fully investigated.

"I've seen some kids turn into, almost, little zombies, or suffer mood
changes," he said.

"There are also milder side effects ... headaches, lethargy, the child
becoming more withdrawn or experiencing a decreased appetite, dizziness, and
dry mouth."

Zacharowicz said he's concerned that doctors aren't running enough
diagnostic tests before prescribing Ritalin.

"Kids in New York have been treated for ADD when what they really had was
lead poisoning," he explains. "That's dangerous, because if lead poisoning
is left untreated, children can get very sick."

http://familyeducation.com/article/0...-12687,00.html

Should a two-year-old be given stimulants like Ritalin? Should a
three-year-old be put on an anti-depressant like Prozac?

A new study reported in this week's Journal of the American Medical
Association (JAMA) finds the rate at which preschoolers were given such
drugs doubled, perhaps even tripled, between 1991 and 1995. Researchers at
the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy analyzed 200,000 preschoolers'
prescription records from two state Medicaid programs and an HMO in the
Northwest over a five-year period. Among the findings:


a.. 1.5% of children between the ages of 2 and 4 received stimulants,
anti-depressants or other anti-psychotic drugs.

a.. In the Medicaid programs, the number of prescriptions for
anti-depressants given to preschoolers more than doubled.
Although the researchers did not note the conditions children were being
treated for, nor the training of the medical staff who prescribed the drugs,
the study is being given serious attention because it suggests that
nationally, as many as 150,000 children under age five may be taking the
drugs. Many are commonly prescribed to older children diagnosed with
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).

Yet few of the medications have been approved by the Food and Drug
Administration for use with toddlers and preschoolers. Methylphenidate, the
generic form of Ritalin, carries a warning against prescribing the drug to
children under six (although it is legal for physicians to do so).

"Unresolved questions involve the long-term safety of psychotropic
medications (with this age group)," wrote the study's lead author, Dr. Julie
Magno Zito. "The possibility of adverse effects on the developing brain
cannot be ruled out."

Prescription for Debate

Some doctors are alarmed by the study's findings. Dr. Joseph Coyle, chairman
of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, warns that even the diagnosis of
ADD/ADHD in very young children is considered unreliable, let alone the
effects of the drugs on a developing brain. Coyle is among those calling for
"much more extensive studies to determine the long-range consequences" of
the use of such drugs at young ages.

But Dr. Joseph Biederman, chief of pediatric psychopharmacology at
Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, angrily dismisses the study and
accuses its authors of having "an ideological bent."

"The purpose of the study is to alarm the public," Biederman insists. "When
you have a three-year-old devastating the household I don't see any reason
why the three-year-old should not be treated. We're talking about serious
out-of-control behavior with some of these children, not one temper
tantrum."

Biederman, who reviewed Zito's research prior to publication, points out
that the study does not indicate what, if any, previous treatment the
children had received.

"If a child has asthma, would you delay treatment until the child is
twenty?" he asks. "If a child has a cavity, it needs to be filled, whether
the child is four or ten."

Moira Munns, parent of a child with ADHD, registered pharmacist, and a
member of the board of directors of the parent-run ADD Information Network,
has mixed feelings about the study.

"I'm a little alarmed," she admits. "I hope parents are working with
competent professionals, because anytime you have people who are desperate,
they are easily taken advantage of."

Munns advises parents to "proceed cautiously" regarding medication to treat
ADD and ADHD in children. Behavior management programs or early intervention
programs, she notes, are "frequently very effective."

"Personally, I always feel that medication is not a best first step," Munns
says. "Better to try other things first."


http://www.psych.org/pnews/00-12-01/study.html

clinical & research news

Study to Assess Ritalin Use in Preschoolers with ADHD

A groundbreaking federally funded study will inform clinicians about the
safety and efficacy of methylphenidate in very young children with attention
deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

By Christine Lehmann

The first multisite study of methylphenidate (Ritalin) in preschoolers with
ADHD is finally beginning after intense scrutiny and review. The Preschool
Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Treatment Study (PATS) has set a
high standard for future psychotropic drug studies in preschoolers to
follow.

"Although Ritalin has been approved by the FDA for use in children aged 6
and up for nearly 40 years, we approached our study as if it was a new drug,
because we know so little about its impact on preschoolers," said Lawrence
Greenhill, M.D., the study's principal investigator. He described the
project at a research forum sponsored by the American Academy of Child and
Adolescent Psychiatry in October in New York.

The goal of the one-day forum was to recommend optimal strategies for
developing and implementing psychopharmacological studies in preschoolers.

Funded by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), the three-year
pediatric study will answer many questions that researchers, clinicians,
policymakers, and members of the public have about methylphenidate's safety
and efficacy in preschoolers.

The need for more information about the medication's use in preschoolers has
taken on a sense of urgency as reports have revealed that physicians are
prescribing the drug to an increasing number of youngsters in this age
group.

Julie Magno Zitto, Ph.D., and her colleagues reported in the February 23
Journal of the American Medical Association that from 1991 through 1995,
there was a three-fold increase in the number of Ritalin prescriptions for
children aged 2 to 5. The prescription records were from two Medicaid and
one private HMO database.

This trend exists despite the drug maker's label warning not to use Ritalin
in children under age 6 because safety and efficacy information has not been
established for this age group. Only a handful of drug studies has been
conducted in preschoolers, with inconclusive results.

The Zitto report concerned some parents, educators, lawmakers, and
clinicians, because the central nervous systems and brain neurotransmitters
targeted by methylphenidate are still developing in preschoolers, said
Greenhill.

The controversy surrounding the drug's safety, especially in preschoolers,
led to a study design that has extremely rigorous eligibility criteria.

Study Goals

About 4,000 children will be recruited and screened for ADHD at six
university sites: Columbia, Duke, Johns Hopkins, New York University, and
the University of California at Los Angeles and Irvine.

Clinicians experienced in treating ADHD and preschool-aged children will
evaluate each child and prepare systematic clinical narratives for review by
several experts to determine the child's eligibility.

The preschoolers must also get an extremely high score on the ADHD symptom
rating scale resulting in less than 4.28 percent of a preschool sample being
identified. Their symptoms must be present for at least 9 months rather than
the 6 months specified by DSM-IV.

"We wanted to ensure that we treat preschoolers with severe ADHD whom
everyone agrees clearly needs help," said Greenhill.

Because of the rigorous eligibility criteria, Greenhill estimates that only
312 preschool (ages 3 through 5) and school-aged (ages 6 through 8) children
will make it into the first phase of the study. Sixty-six school-aged
children will serve as the control group.

Once the children are accepted into the study, their parents will be trained
in behavioral management techniques that have been shown to be effective in
moderating ADHD symptoms, said Greenhill.

He added this component to the protocol because some children may respond
well to behavioral therapy. On the basis of a previous large study comparing
methylphenidate with behavior therapy in school-aged children, Greenhill
estimates that 58 children will respond to the behavioral therapy
techniques.

He estimates that the remaining 198 preschoolers and 66 school-aged children
will be enrolled in the randomized medication trial.

Determining the safest and most effective dose for each child is the goal of
the first 12 weeks of the trial. Doses of methylphenidate are titrated from
1.25 mg three times daily to 10 mg three times daily during the first three
weeks and then increased from 2.5 mg daily to 10 mg three times daily in the
following nine weeks.

"The review boards wanted us to start with the lowest dose possible for
safety reasons," explained Greenhill.

Once the best dose is established, subjects are maintained for 40 weeks on
Ritalin or placebo and then taken off. The children will be followed for one
year.

Another goal of the study is to compare the response times and dose
responses in preschoolers with those of school-aged subjects. "We know
significantly more about the safety and efficacy of Ritalin in school-aged
children than we do in preschool children," said Greenhill.

Reviews and Revisions

Greenhill said that the controversy over prescribing methylphenidate led to
numerous reviews of PATS. The process involved the NIMH Special Emphasis
Panel, NIMH Council Workgroup on Ethics, NIMH Data Monitoring and Safety
Board, the Food and Drug Administration Division of Neuropharmacological
Drug Products, and each of the six sites' institutional review boards,
according to Greenhill.

These were among the recommendations made by the reviewers, which Greenhill
and his colleagues incorporated into the final study design:

.. Start with the lowest dose possible.

.. Obtain informed consent from parents at every stage of the trial.

.. Exclude children with bipolar, pervasive developmental, and psychotic
disorders.

.. Ensure that children can speak English in phrases so they can communicate
any problems to adults.

.. Have experienced pediatric educators serve as consultants at all sites.

.. Have a community and parent representative on each site's Institutional
Review Board.

.. Provide age-appropriate furniture and toys at the study sites.

The researchers also established parental advisory panels at each site.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl.../dontknow.html

In February 2000, University of Maryland researcher Julie Magno Zito
published a report in the Journal of the American Medical Association which
found that psychotropic medications such as Ritalin and Adderall were being
prescribed to preschoolers at alarmingly high rates, especially considering
that many of the drugs have not been approved by the FDA for use in children
under 6, and there's little research about their effects on young children.
Zito examined data from two state Medicaid programs and a health maintenance
organization, and found that as many as 1.5 percent of children between the
ages of 2 and 4 were being prescribed stimulants, anti-depressants, or
anti-psychotic drugs. The findings suggested that prescription rates had
increased as much as 50 percent between 1990 and 1995. Although the study
did not identify which conditions the children were being treated for, in
the Washington Post, Zito said she believed that the rise in prescription
rates for very young children was definitely related to the recent national
increase in Ritalin prescriptions for school-aged children.

Zito's report drew strong media coverage and also attracted the attention of
Hillary Clinton, who embarked on a campaign to learn more about the effects
of drugs like Ritalin on preschoolers. Subsequently, the National Institute
of Mental Health gave $6 million to a consortium of six institutions, led by
Dr. Laurence Greenhill of Columbia University, to conduct a five-stage,
40-week study on Ritalin use in preschoolers. This is the first extensive
study to be done on this issue.

The Preschool ADHD Treatment Study (PATS) will examine dosing issues, side
effects questions, and the efficacy of Ritalin in preschool aged children.
As of April 2001, the recruitment of children into the study is underway at
the six sites across the country. The effort is to find out how well
children ages 3-6 do on a trial of methylphenidate in the short term and
over the relative long term (1 year). In order to compare how Ritalin
affects younger children to older children, the study will also recruit
subjects between 6 and 8 years old.

Some critics have expressed concerns about the recruitment process, saying
that it may be hard to diagnose ADHD in such young children. Dr. Howard
Abikoff, who is heading up the study at one of the sites at the NYU Child
Study Center, says those concerns, while valid, have been addressed by the
design of the study. Subjects are required to show persistent symptoms of
ADHD for 9 months, rather than the 6 months required by the DSM-IV criteria.
Subjects must be attending a school-type setting, and data must be gathered
from a teacher or professional in that setting, rather than parents alone.
And finally, before a subject is approved for the study, the parents undergo
a 10-week training in behavioral therapy specifically designed for parents
young kids with ADHD. The child is then reevaluated, and if he or she no
longer meets the criteria, will not be considered for the study. "We are not
interested in putting children on medication for whom there is not an
obvious need," Abikoff said.

The study is designed in the hopes that the resulting data will be extensive
enough to meet the FDA requirements for making a ruling as to whether
Ritalin is appropriate and safe for use in young children. The researchers
are planning to follow up with the subjects of the study over the long term,
in order to see how the children treated with Ritalin early in life fare as
they grow older.


http://www.mindfreedom.org/mindfreedom/levine_c.shtml

NEWS: Human Rights & Your Mind - May 9, 2002

Bruce Levine -- psychologist, mental health system critic and author of the
book _Commonsense Rebellion_, wrote the below commentary that was published
today's main newspaper for Eugene, Oregon, USA.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

_The Register-Guard_ -- Eugene, Oregon, USA

May 9, 2002 - Page 9A - Opinion/Commentary

Tide of drugs won't mend mental health

By BRUCE LEVINE

IS THE HUGE EXPANSION of America's mental health industry about science, or
is it about marketing? And is there even a more important concern than
pseudoscience and Big Pharma corruption?

In the 1970s, approximately 250,000 American children were on Ritalin and
Ritalin-like drugs, while today estimates range from 4 million to 6 million
kids. Not many years ago, prescribing Ritalin to preschoolers would have
been unthinkable, but currently more than 200,000 American preschoolers are
on Ritalin and Ritalin-like drugs for attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder.

Is it scientifically valid to say that a 3-year-old who is "forgetful,"
"disorganized," "inattentive," and "impatient" - symptoms for ADHD - suffers
from a mental disorder? Even if you believe that 3-year-olds can have ADHD,
there is no scientifically reliable way of diagnosing them. According to the
National Institute of Mental Health and the American Academy of Pediatrics,
there are no biological markers for ADHD, and thus it is not diagnosed with
lab tests or physical exams, but rather is diagnosed using behavioral
checklists - which are notoriously unreliable.

ADHD drugs are forms of "speed," among the most abused drugs in the world.
In 2001, the Journal of the American Medical Association published this
article: "Pay Attention: Ritalin Acts Much Like Cocaine." Just how effective
are these drugs? In 1999 the U.S. Surgeon General reported that Ritalin and
Ritalin-like drugs "do not appear to achieve long-term changes in outcomes
such as peer relationships, social or academic skills, or school
achievement."

Then there are the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs, such
as Prozac, Paxil, and Zoloft. Even those prescribing SSRIs, including
Harvard Medical School psychiatrist Joseph Glenmullen, admit that SSRIs are
linked to neurological disorders indicating potential brain damage.
Glenmullen also notes: "Withdrawal syndromes - which can be debilitating -
are estimated to affect up to 50 percent of patients." What industrial
psychiatry tells us about SSRI effectiveness is also more marketing than
science. Most studies show SSRIs to be no better than active placebos
(which, unlike sugar pills, affect the body).

Why is all this not common knowledge? Follow the money trail. The TV
commercials are only the beginning of the trail. Drug companies induce
doctors' attendance at their sales pitches by not only picking up the tab
for expensive hotels and meals, but also giving large cash payments to these
doctors. The American Psychiatric Association and the National Alliance for
the Mentally Ill have taken millions of dollars from drug companies, and the
legal corruption of U.S. governmental agencies has gotten so bad that
Lancet, the highly respected British medical journal, recently described the
Food and Drug Administration as "the servants of the drug industry."

However, I believe there is another problem besides invalid disorders,
unreliable diagnostic procedures, ineffective and dangerous drugs, and Big
Pharma corruption. The mental health industry has diverted us from
confronting a culture that has grown increasingly toxic to our mental
health; it has enabled us to avoid these questions: Has our one-dimensional
consumer culture of material growth, efficiency, and productivity played
havoc with our mental health? Has our expanding "institutionalization" - the
explosion of gigantic, impersonal, bureaucratic, and coercive entities -
left us feeling small, frightened, alienated, angry and bored?

I believe that our emotional and behavioral difficulties are natural human
reactions to the loss of 1) autonomy: self-direction, experience of potency,
and capacity and ability to self-govern, 2) community: strong bonds among
small groups that provide for economic security and emotional satisfaction,
and 3) humanity: the variety of ways of being human, the variety of
satisfactions, and the variety of negative reactions to feeling controlled
rather than understood.

What can we do? First, what has been pathologized needs to be rehumanized.
We need to reacquaint ourselves with those aspects of our humanity which -
though not fitting neatly into the new world order - are in fact fully
human.

Next, we must rebel - a common sense rebellion. I recommend we withdraw from
the madness of industrial psychiatry, and we begin to help ourselves and
each other by regaining our autonomy, restoring our community, and
reclaiming our humanity.

~~~~~~~~~

Bruce Levine is a psychologist and author of "Commonsense Rebellion:
Debunking Psychiatry, Confronting Society - An A to Z Guide to Rehumanizing
Our Lives."

~~~~~~~~~

LOS ANGELES AREA -- SAVE THIS DATE --

SUNDAY -- 19 May 2002

Here's a chance to get into beautiful Santa Monica, meet a few other Support
Coalition International members, poke around probably the hippest bookstore
in Los Angeles country, and MOST OF ALL, become acquainted with Bruce E.
Levine, author of the recently published Commonsense Rebellion: Debunking
Psychiatry, Confronting Society (An A to Z Guide to Rehumanizing Our Lives.

On Sunday, May 19th, at 2:00 PM, Dr. Levine, a psychologist and mental
health dissident, will be speaking at the Midnight Special Bookstore, 1318
3rd Street Promenade in Santa Monica. In Commonsense Rebellion he argues the
currently unorthodox position that emotional "disorders," from anxiety to
schizophrenia, as well as many other examples of apparent human frailty,
such as obesity, alcoholism, and compulsive gambling, are not "diseases like
any other diseases," but are rebellious responses to an institutional
society which worships speed, bureaucracy, power, and technology at the
expense of autonomy, community, and humanity. He suggests that quick fix
psychiatry, its diagnostic categories, drugs, and manipulative techniques
are no substitute for rehumanizing our lives. Please join us to listen to
and dialogue with Dr. Bruce Levine. He's a good guy and an interesting man.
And, hey, it's just a few blocks from the beach.

Mickey Weinberg and Beverly Jones

Dr. Bruce Levine Sunday, May 19, 2:00 p.m. Midnight Special Bookstore --
1318 3rd St. Promenade Santa Monica 310/393-2923

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Quotes from Bruce Levine:]

*** "The psychiatric pharmaceutical industry has created a pseudoscience of
invalid disorders, unreliable diagnostic procedures, and ineffective
dangerous drugs."

*** "Biochemical explanations distract us from examining serious cultural
problems."

*** "Institutional mental health sees illness to help us 'adjust.'
Commonsense Rebellion sees discontent with institutional society and offers
a different direction."

*** "Reject institutional mental health. Rehumanize our lives. Reclaim our
autonomy, community, and humanity."

Praise for Levine's national speaking tour:

"Everyone thought Levine's presentation was stupendous." Louise Bouta,
WellMind of Minn.
--
Peter Bowditch

"Mark Probert wrote:
vernon wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
vernon wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
vernon wrote:
Ilena wrote in message
...
P.net!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: "VERACARE"


Why has the FDA concealed from the public 51 deaths from ADHD drugs
until
now?

ALL diversions snipped

Back to the subject::

P.net!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: "VERACARE"

ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION (AHRP)
Promoting Openness, Full Disclosure, and Accountability
www.ahrp.org

FYI

Children have been dying as the FDA looked the other way: Reuters
reports
that sudden death, high blood pressure, heart attacks and strokes have
been
reported in people prescribed psychostimulants (i.e., amphetamines)
for a
controversial behavior disorder--ADHD--a disorder about which there is
no
consensus.

Why has the FDA concealed from the public 51 deaths from ADHD drugs
until
now?

"Through 2003, 24 deaths were reported from 1999 through 2003 among
U.S.
patients who took Adderall for ADHD, the FDA staff report said. The
agency
excluded cases that appeared linked to intoxication from multiple
drugs or
other causes.

Another 16 deaths were reported through 2003 in U.S. patients who took
Ritalin or other ADHD drugs known as methylphenidates, the report
said.
Eleven deaths were reported among other drugs besides Adderall in the
amphetamine class, it said."

"Conclusions about the relative safety of these two stimulant
therapies
cannot be made on the basis of this analysis," the FDA staff said.

Evidence of the FDA's failure for well over a decade to protect
children's
lives from unsafe, widely misprescribed drugs used to control
behavior--as
opposed to treat illness--can be analyzed by counting the preventable
human
casualties.

The FDA is convening a long overdue Advisory Committee meeting to
address
the death toll from ADHD drugs--the very same class of drugs that the
Drug
Enforcement Agency is at "war" with when consumed without a doctor's
prescription.

How many parents have been informed that the drugs they feed their
child to
get him (ADHD drugs are mostly prescribed for boys) to sit still and
pay
attention--are in the same family as the drugs former First Lady,
Nancy
Reagan campaigned against urging kids to "just say NO."

Parents should be taught to tell doctors who are quick to prescribe
psychotropic drugs for children to "Just say NO."

AHRP board member, Allen Jones, will be testifying about undisclosed
conflicts of interest that undermine the integrity of FDA's advisory
committees.

The advisory panel members' undisclosed conflicts of interest
demonstrate
the FDA's complicity in putting financial interests above safety. And
it
demonstrate's FDA officials' disregard for federal conflicts of
interest
requirements. It is, perhaps, not just a coincidence that while still
under
investigation, former FDA Commissioner, Lester Crawford, has joined a
lobbying group that promotes food and drug industry interests.

Elen Liversidge will be testifying on behalf of the thousands of
famileis
whose children are casualties of psychotropic drugs--stimulants,
antidepressants, and antipsychotics--all of which are dangerous and
toxic.
It might be more effective if these drugs don't just carry a black
box, but
a scull and bones.


Contact: Vera Hassner Sharav
212-595-8974



http://abcnews.go.com/US/print?id=1595545

FDA reports 51 deaths of attention drug patientsReuters
WASHINGTON - Deaths of 51 U.S. patients who took widely prescribed
drugs to
treat attention deficit disorder prompted regulators to start watching
for
heart attacks, high blood pressure and other problems in 2004, a
report
released on Wednesday said.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration staff did not say the drugs were
responsible for the fatalities, but they urged close monitoring for
"the
rare occurrence of pediatric sudden death during stimulant therapy."

"These reports themselves do not establish a causal relationship
between
these medications and cardiovascular adverse events," wrote Dr. Gerald
Dal
Pan, director of the FDA's Office of Drug Safety, in a separate notice
on
the agency Web site.

The information was released one day ahead of an FDA advisory panel
meeting
on how best to study potential risks from the drugs, which include
Shire
Pharmaceuticals Group Plc's Adderall and Novartis AG's Ritalin.

FDA staff scientists and experts will provide updated information at
the
meeting about serious health problems that have been reported, the
agency
said.

Use of drugs to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, or
ADHD, was
controversial before the cardiac issue emerged, with many doctors and
parents arguing the medicines are overprescribed.

The FDA said it decided to seek input from an advisory panel after
reports
of sudden death, high blood pressure, heart attacks and strokes among
some
of the millions of adults and children who have taken the medicines.

Through 2003, 24 deaths were reported from 1999 through 2003 among
U.S.
patients who took Adderall for ADHD, the FDA staff report said. The
agency
excluded cases that appeared linked to intoxication from multiple
drugs or
other causes.

Another 16 deaths were reported through 2003 in U.S. patients who took
Ritalin or other ADHD drugs known as methylphenidates, the report
said.
Eleven deaths were reported among other drugs besides Adderall in the
amphetamine class, it said.

"Conclusions about the relative safety of these two stimulant
therapies
cannot be made on the basis of this analysis," the FDA staff said.

Thirty additional deaths of methylphenidate patients were recorded but
they
were either non-U.S. cases or occurred outside the review period, the
report
said.

Shire spokesman Matthew Cabrey said data have not shown any
correlation
between Adderall and the sudden deaths reported among children. He
said the
company supports the FDA's review of the matter.

Health Canada temporarily suspended Adderall sales last year after 20
reports of sudden death in people who took it. The agency allowed
Adderall
back on the market after concluding it could not prove the drug was
more
risky than other therapies.

Novartis said its own review found no increased risk of cardiovascular
problems in patients who took methylphenidates compared with the
general
population.

The FDA also has been studying if ADHD drugs may be related to
psychiatric
problems.

Republican Sen. Charles Grassley charged the FDA had taken a
"disjointed"
approach to the drugs over the past year. In a letter to the agency,
the
Iowa Republican suggested a "comprehensive" review of all ADHD
medicines.

Shares of British firm Shire fell 3.2 percent to 890.2 pence in London
trading. Novartis shares gained 5 cents to close at $54.70 on the New
York
Stock Exchange.

Copyright 2006 Reuters News Service. All rights reserved. This
material may
not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Copyright C 2006 ABC News Internet Ventures

http://www.thepinksheetdaily.com/NR/FDC/images/pdly/print_masthead.gif

THE PINK SHEET
February 07, 2006
Number 004

Grassley Mows Down FDA Handling Of ADHD Drug Safety

14060207004

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is urging
FDA to
conduct a comprehensive review of side effects associated with
attention
deficit/hyperactivity disorder drugs.
In a Feb. 7 letter to Acting FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach,
Gr!
assley acknowledges that the agency is taking steps to discuss safety
concerns related to ADHD drugs, but says that the planned advisory
committee
meetings are inadequate.

On Feb. 9, FDA's Drug Safety Risk Management Advisory Committee will
discuss
cardiovascular events associated with ADHD drugs. On March 22, the
Pediatric
Advisory Committee will discuss neuropsychiatric adverse events in the
pediatric ADHD population.
[Editor's note: To 1sign up for a webcast
http://www.fdaadvisorycommittee.com/ or order a video/DVD of these
meetings, visit FDAAdvisoryCommittee.com.]

Grassley said he remains "concerned that lost between the two meetings
is a
comprehensive review of all adverse events for this entire class of
medication for all populations served."
He called FDA's actions thus far "ad hoc and disjointed."

Additionally, Grassley added, "While both psychiatric and
cardiovascular
risk signals have cropped up across this class of drugs this past
year, it
appears that FDA is just now beginning to 'discuss approaches' for
studying
these risks."

In June 2005, the committee concluded that reports of suicidality with
Johnson & Johnson's Concerta and other methylphenidate products did
not
constitute a new signal for concern.
In September, FDA issued a public health advisory on suicidal thinking
in
children and adolescents taking Lilly's Strattera for ADHD. The agency
said
it would not add a warning to other ADHD products pending an analysis
of
post-marketing adverse events from those products (2"The Pink Sheet"
DAILY,
Sept. 29, 2005
http://www.thepinksheetdaily.com/fdc...o?targetAN=140
50929002 ).

"I question why it has taken nearly an entire year for FDA to begin to
address these concerns, given the serious nature of the adverse events
associated with these drugs," Grassley said.
FDA's Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee will convene March
23 to
review a pending ADHD drug, Cephalon's Sparlon (modafinil), which has
the
same active ingredient as Cephalon's sleep disorder therapy Provigil
(3"The
Pink Sheet" DAILY, Jan. 25, 2006
http://www.thepinksheetdaily.com/fdc...o?targetAN=140
60125006 ). One topic the committee will likely address will be how
to
distinguish Sparlon from other ADHD drugs with regard to potential
safety
issues.
-Kathleen Michael

Contents copyrighted C F-D-C Reports, Inc. 2006; protected by U.S.
Copyright
Law.

Former FDA Chief Joins Lobby Shop

By Marc Kaufman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 8, 2006; A06

Former Food and Drug Administration commissioner Lester M. Crawford,
whose
sudden resignation last fall after less than three months in office
remains
a mystery, has joined a lobbying firm that specializes in food and
drug
issues.

Crawford is listed as "senior counsel" to the firm Policy Directions
Inc.
Among the companies and organizations listed as clients are Altria
Group
Inc. (formerly Philip Morris Companies), Merck & Co. Inc., the
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA,) the
Grocery
Manufacturers of America and the American Feed Industry Association. A
spokesman for the firm said neither Crawford nor anyone else wished to
discuss his appointment.

When he resigned in September, Crawford said simply that it was time
for
someone else to lead the agency. Sens. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) and Edward
M.
Kennedy (D-Mass.) have asked the Department of Health and Human
Services
inspector general to look into whether Crawford resigned because of an
undisclosed financial conflict of interest.

Laura Bradbard, spokeswoman for the office, said yesterday that the
investigation is ongoing and that her office has subpoenaed
information from

three financial firms used by the former commissioner.

Crawford is barred from lobbying former colleagues at the FDA for a
year,
but he can give clients strategic advice about food and drug issues
and can
lobby members of Congress.

Policy Directions was founded by Frankie L. Trull, a prominent
defender of
animal testing for medical research and critic of animal rights
groups. On
its Web site, the company says Crawford joined last month but gives no
indication what his role will be.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted (C ) material the use of
which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.
Such
material is made available for educational purposes, to advance
understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical,
and
social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a
'fair
use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17
U.S.C.
section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed
without
profit.

"vernon wrote:

ALL diversions snipped
...
In article , Mark Probert
writes:
"Twenty-five people died suddenly and 54 others suffered serious
unexplained heart problems while taking stimulant drugs like Ritalin
from 1999 through 2003, according to reports sent to federal drug
regulators."

"Rich wrote

ALL diversions snipped


, Mark Probert
writes:
"Twenty-five people died suddenly and 54 others suffered serious
unexplained heart problems while taking stimulant drugs like Ritalin
from 1999 through 2003, according to reports sent to federal drug
regulators


--Rich

"vernon wrote

ALL diversions snipped
..

"Brad_Chad" wrote in message
oups.com...
If conventional doctors had any moral integrity, they would have at
least given all their ADHD patients a choice of either medication, or
help with finding their Hidden Food Sensitivities. Instead, they go
straight for the drugs. They don't tell their patients anything about
the Hidden Food Sensitivity controversy. What greedy wimps. They sold
their soul to the pharmaceutical companies.

Brad_Chad

"JanD" wrote in message
news:2NsHf.769297$_o.482080@attbi_s71...

"vernon wrote:

ALL diversions snipped
..
In article , Mark Probert
writes:
"Twenty-five people died suddenly and 54 others suffered serious
unexplained heart problems while taking stimulant drugs like Ritalin
from 1999 through 2003, according to reports sent to federal drug
regulators."

AND???

All medications are life threatening.

vernon wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
vernon wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
vernon wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
vernon wrote:
Ilena wrote in message
...
P.net!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: "VERACARE"


Why has the FDA concealed from the public 51 deaths from ADHD drugs
until
now?

51 out of around 100,000 per year of miss-prescribed and errors is
quite insignificant.
You are mistaken in your interpretation of the numbers. The NY Times
reported that this was a study of five years of records, 1999 through
2003. The number of deaths is also incorrect.

"Twenty-five people died suddenly and 54 others suffered serious
unexplained heart problems while taking stimulant drugs like Ritalin
from 1999 through 2003, according to reports sent to federal drug
regulators."

Now, let's take a minute and analyze this. Twenty-five people died
over the course of 5 years. That averages to 5 deaths per year. The
NYTimes then reports that "...[a]bout 29 million prescriptions were
written in 2004 for Ritalin, Adderall and similar drugs to treat
attention deficit disorder and hyperactivity, most of them for
children."

Assume that the average prescription rate is *only* 25,000,000 per
year. Since these medications are Schedule II, which means that only a
one months supply can be written at a time, approximately 2,083,333
people per month are, on average, being prescribed these medications.

Assume that all 5 deaths happened in the same month, and you wind up
with a rate of 2.4000003840000614400098304015729e-6.

Compare that with the odds of being struck by lightening:

http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/medical.htm

My younger son attends a special school for physically handicapped
students. In the past three years, two classmates have died for no
apparent reason, the last being in December 2005. One of the kids in
my neighborhood died from running the bases. His father is a DDS and
was at the school at the time. He is trained in using a defibrillator
and could not resuscitate his son.

I would classify this report and just this side of relatively
meaningless.

That's what I said.
Yeah, but not as well as I did...

The numbers really do not add up very well.

Ever wonder about how many die of no apparent reason?
Like I pointed out in the paragraph above, yes, on three occasions in
the past 2 years. One boy rode the bus with my younger son and they hung
out together outside of school. He did not wake up one morning.

One boy was the captain of my son's school's wheelchair basketball team.
No arms and two underdeveloped legs. He used one to operate the joystick
on his power chair, and the other, the longer of the two, for dribbling,
stealing and shooting. His mother thought he was sleeping on the school
bus when he came home from school.

The third is a neighborhood kid who had just finished running the bases
and died.

From the little I have seen, it is sickening. Not a conspiracy, but
lack of involvement and laws to determine.
It is very shocking for parents to sudden lose a child who is in
apparent good medical health. Sadly, even on autopsy, the actual cause
of death cannot often be determined. I know in the two cases where I
know the families well, they still do not know what happened. Both boys,
having physical disabilities, had been carefully examined and monitored
over the years.
It is always pretty close to possible to determine cause if there is a
desire. I know parents have a desire, but seemingly are easy to be put
off with "We just don't know"
I know the medical examiners involved, and they ALWAYS have a desire with
kids.

Good. It's unusual.

Maybe where you live. The team I have dealt with on a professional level
truly do believe that they are speaking for the dead. They are ALL
board certified forensic pathologists, in a setting which is affiliated
with a teaching hospital. The training is excellent according to one
graduate I bumped into in Michigan.

JanD wrote:
"Mark Probert wrote:
vernon wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
vernon wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
vernon wrote:
Ilena wrote in message
...
P.net!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: "VERACARE"


Why has the FDA concealed from the public 51 deaths from ADHD drugs
until
now?

ALL diversions snipped

Back to the subject::

Sorry, but you are diverting. Back to the friendly discussion that you
cannot stand.



51 out of around 100,000 per year of miss-prescribed and errors
is quite insignificant.
You are mistaken in your interpretation of the numbers. The NY
Times reported that this was a study of five years of records, 1999
through 2003. The number of deaths is also incorrect.

"Twenty-five people died suddenly and 54 others suffered serious
unexplained heart problems while taking stimulant drugs like Ritalin
from 1999 through 2003, according to reports sent to federal drug
regulators."

Now, let's take a minute and analyze this. Twenty-five people died
over the course of 5 years. That averages to 5 deaths per year. The
NYTimes then reports that "...[a]bout 29 million prescriptions were
written in 2004 for Ritalin, Adderall and similar drugs to treat
attention deficit disorder and hyperactivity, most of them for children."

Assume that the average prescription rate is *only* 25,000,000 per
year. Since these medications are Schedule II, which means that only a
one months supply can be written at a time, approximately 2,083,333
people per month are, on average, being prescribed these medications.

Assume that all 5 deaths happened in the same month, and you wind
up with a rate of 2.4000003840000614400098304015729e-6.

Compare that with the odds of being struck by lightening:

http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/medical.htm

My younger son attends a special school for physically handicapped
students. In the past three years, two classmates have died for no
apparent reason, the last being in December 2005. One of the kids in my
neighborhood died from running the bases. His father is a DDS and was at
the school at the time. He is trained in using a defibrillator and could
not resuscitate his son.

I would classify this report and just this side of relatively
meaningless.

That's what I said.
Yeah, but not as well as I did...

The numbers really do not add up very well.

Ever wonder about how many die of no apparent reason?
Like I pointed out in the paragraph above, yes, on three occasions
in the past 2 years. One boy rode the bus with my younger son and they
hung out together outside of school. He did not wake up one morning.

One boy was the captain of my son's school's wheelchair basketball
team. No arms and two underdeveloped legs. He used one to operate the
joystick on his power chair, and the other, the longer of the two, for
dribbling, stealing and shooting. His mother thought he was sleeping on
the school bus when he came home from school.

The third is a neighborhood kid who had just finished running the
bases and died.

From the little I have seen, it is sickening. Not a conspiracy,
but lack of involvement and laws to determine.
It is very shocking for parents to sudden lose a child who is in
apparent good medical health. Sadly, even on autopsy, the actual cause
of death cannot often be determined. I know in the two cases where I
know the families well, they still do not know what happened. Both boys,
having physical disabilities, had been carefully examined and monitored
over the years.

It is always pretty close to possible to determine cause if there is
a desire. I know parents have a desire, but seemingly are easy to be
put off with "We just don't know"

I know the medical examiners involved, and they ALWAYS have a desire
with kids.