The rise in prodcution

This is from an article entitled Talking Back to Breggin, written by Prof.
Russell Barkley. It addresses the claims of the know nothings about the FDA,
DEA etc. and the orchestrated rise in MPH production. As some may know,
Barkely is one of the leading authorities in ADHD diagnosis and treatment.

http://www.quackwatch.org/04Consumer...R/breggin.html

Special note to Jan Drew: This is a reprint of the original article so read
it for your education, and you do need one.


The book's biases and unbalanced scholarsl-lip are evident from the very
first page of Chapter 1. Here the author quotes that 'The U.S. Drug
Enforcement Administration ... has warned about a record six-fold increase
in Ritalin production between 1990 and 1995.' And that "The International
Narcotics Control Board. . . deplores that 'l 0 to 12 percent' of all boys
between ages 6 and 14 in the United States have been diagnosed as having ADD
and are being treated with methylphenidate [Ritalin]." Withheld from the
reader are the following facts that would have helped to put these
statements in their proper perspective:

Ritalin production does not directly equate with Ritalin prescribing, the
latter being far lower than the former;
this ridiculously large rise in Ritalin production was largely orchestrated
by the DEA itself after having been soundly and rightly criticized in 1993
for allowing a shortfall of this medication to occur in the US. This
deprived some children in some parts of the country from being able to
obtain their medication for several months until the DEA corrected its
mistake. Subsequently, the DEA dramatically raised production quotas so this
would not happen again;
it was the DEA that had informed the International Narcotics Control Board
about the supposedly dramatic rise in Ritalin use in the U.S., and was
thanked by the Narcotics Control Board for this assistance at its press
conference, even though the figures cited by the Board were wrong; and
this press conference was arranged at a time when CHADD, leading scientists,
the American Academy of Child Neurology, and others had petitioned the
government (starting with the DEA) to declassify Ritalin out of the category
of addictive drugs and into a more appropriate category with other
nonaddictive psychiatric medications -- a petition the DEA did not wish to
approve.

In article ,
Marko Proberto wrote:
This is from an article entitled Talking Back to Breggin, written by Prof.
Russell Barkley. It addresses the claims of the know nothings about the FDA,
DEA etc. and the orchestrated rise in MPH production. As some may know,
Barkely is one of the leading authorities in ADHD diagnosis and treatment.

http://www.quackwatch.org/04Consumer...R/breggin.html

Special note to Jan Drew: This is a reprint of the original article so read
it for your education, and you do need one.

Someone's scanner (?) isn't working very well; I've taken it upon
myself to fix the few weirdnesses in the transcription.

The book's biases and unbalanced scholarship are evident from the
very first page of Chapter 1. Here the author quotes that 'The
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration ... has warned about a record
six-fold increase in Ritalin production between 1990 and 1995.' And
that "The International Narcotics Control Board. . . deplores that
'10 to 12 percent' of all boys between ages 6 and 14 in the United
States have been diagnosed as having ADD and are being treated with
methylphenidate [Ritalin]." Withheld from the reader are the
following facts that would have helped to put these statements in
their proper perspective:

Ritalin production does not directly equate with Ritalin prescribing,
the latter being far lower than the former; this ridiculously large
rise in Ritalin production was largely orchestrated by the DEA itself
after having been soundly and rightly criticized in 1993 for allowing
a shortfall of this medication to occur in the US. This deprived
some children in some parts of the country from being able to obtain
their medication for several months until the DEA corrected its
mistake. Subsequently, the DEA dramatically raised production quotas
so this would not happen again; it was the DEA that had informed the
International Narcotics Control Board about the supposedly dramatic
rise in Ritalin use in the U.S., and was thanked by the Narcotics
Control Board for this assistance at its press conference, even
though the figures cited by the Board were wrong; and this press
conference was arranged at a time when CHADD, leading scientists, the
American Academy of Child Neurology, and others had petitioned the
government (starting with the DEA) to declassify Ritalin out of the
category of addictive drugs and into a more appropriate category with
other nonaddictive psychiatric medications -- a petition the DEA did
not wish to approve.

Thanks for posting this. It probably won't do any good; Jan and her
ilk will continue to post their distortions, but the rest of us can
appreciate the corrections.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:41:56 GMT, "Marko Proberto"
wrote:

this ridiculously large rise in Ritalin production was largely orchestrated
by the DEA itself

Interesting..

"David Wright" wrote in message
m...
In article ,
Marko Proberto wrote:
This is from an article entitled Talking Back to Breggin, written by
Prof.
Russell Barkley. It addresses the claims of the know nothings about the
FDA,
DEA etc. and the orchestrated rise in MPH production. As some may know,
Barkely is one of the leading authorities in ADHD diagnosis and
treatment.

http://www.quackwatch.org/04Consumer...R/breggin.html

Special note to Jan Drew: This is a reprint of the original article so
read
it for your education, and you do need one.

Someone's scanner (?) isn't working very well; I've taken it upon
myself to fix the few weirdnesses in the transcription.

The book's biases and unbalanced scholarship are evident from the
very first page of Chapter 1. Here the author quotes that 'The
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration ... has warned about a record
six-fold increase in Ritalin production between 1990 and 1995.' And
that "The International Narcotics Control Board. . . deplores that
'10 to 12 percent' of all boys between ages 6 and 14 in the United
States have been diagnosed as having ADD and are being treated with
methylphenidate [Ritalin]." Withheld from the reader are the
following facts that would have helped to put these statements in
their proper perspective:

Ritalin production does not directly equate with Ritalin prescribing,
the latter being far lower than the former; this ridiculously large
rise in Ritalin production was largely orchestrated by the DEA itself
after having been soundly and rightly criticized in 1993 for allowing
a shortfall of this medication to occur in the US. This deprived
some children in some parts of the country from being able to obtain
their medication for several months until the DEA corrected its
mistake. Subsequently, the DEA dramatically raised production quotas
so this would not happen again; it was the DEA that had informed the
International Narcotics Control Board about the supposedly dramatic
rise in Ritalin use in the U.S., and was thanked by the Narcotics
Control Board for this assistance at its press conference, even
though the figures cited by the Board were wrong; and this press
conference was arranged at a time when CHADD, leading scientists, the
American Academy of Child Neurology, and others had petitioned the
government (starting with the DEA) to declassify Ritalin out of the
category of addictive drugs and into a more appropriate category with
other nonaddictive psychiatric medications -- a petition the DEA did
not wish to approve.

Thanks for posting this. It probably won't do any good; Jan and her
ilk will continue to post their distortions, but the rest of us can
appreciate the corrections.

It also dispels the lie that it was CHADD only that petitioned for a change
in schedule. Many o fthe liars do not know how difficult it is to get the
doctors to write a monthly script for a medication. Some people have
prescription plans, and cannot use a local pharmacy, and need to mail away a
script every month. It is just one more burden on parents who are dealing
with the family consuming problem of ADHD.

"jake" nospamhere@all wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:41:56 GMT, "Marko Proberto"
wrote:

this ridiculously large rise in Ritalin production was largely
orchestrated
by the DEA itself

Interesting..

I thought so, too. Then, I asked myself why? I looked and could not find a
good reason, but, using my keen powers of idle conjecture, I concluded that
the DEA is a political being, looking to maintain its turf, and this is but
one more way for them to do so.

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:13:39 GMT, "Marcurio Probertio"
wrote:


"jake" nospamhere@all wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:41:56 GMT, "Marko Proberto"
wrote:

this ridiculously large rise in Ritalin production was largely
orchestrated
by the DEA itself

Interesting..

I thought so, too. Then, I asked myself why? I looked and could not find a
good reason, but, using my keen powers of idle conjecture, I concluded that
the DEA is a political being, looking to maintain its turf, and this is but
one more way for them to do so.

Stan Cohen taught me that "It doesnt matter what the question is..the
answer is power."

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:13:39 GMT, "Marcurio Probertio"
wrote:

"jake" nospamhere@all wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:41:56 GMT, "Marko Proberto"
wrote:

this ridiculously large rise in Ritalin production was largely
orchestrated
by the DEA itself

Interesting..

I thought so, too. Then, I asked myself why? I looked and could not find a
good reason, but, using my keen powers of idle conjecture, I concluded that
the DEA is a political being, looking to maintain its turf, and this is but
one more way for them to do so.

WHAT??? DEA *political?*

I suppose next thing you'll tell us is that DEA is a division of the Department
of Justice--law enforcement guys.

(Huh? They *are* under DoJ? Oh.)

Never mind.

Joe Parsons

Joe Parsons wrote:

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:13:39 GMT, "Marcurio Probertio"
wrote:

"jake" nospamhere@all wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:41:56 GMT, "Marko Proberto"
wrote:

this ridiculously large rise in Ritalin production was largely
orchestrated
by the DEA itself

Interesting..

I thought so, too. Then, I asked myself why? I looked and could not find a
good reason, but, using my keen powers of idle conjecture, I concluded that
the DEA is a political being, looking to maintain its turf, and this is but
one more way for them to do so.

WHAT??? DEA *political?*

I suppose next thing you'll tell us is that DEA is a division of the Department
of Justice--law enforcement guys.

(Huh? They *are* under DoJ? Oh.)

Never mind.

But surely the DEA follows in the proud professional tradition
established by its predecessor, the BNDD.

Oh.

Never mind.^2