A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » Kids Health
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

FDA—KNOWING WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 9th 06, 03:35 PM posted to misc.health.alternative,misc.kids.health,talk.politics.medicine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FDA—KNOWING WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD

FRED A. BAUGHMAN, JR. M.D.

NEUROLOGY AND CHILD NEUROLOGY (Board Certified)

FELLOW, AMERICAN ACADEMY OF NEUROLOGY




FDA—KNOWING WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD
(6163 words)



Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD



Representative Cornelius E. Gallagher of New Jersey, presiding, opened
the September 29, 1970 Hearing on Federal Involvement in the Use of
Behavior Modification Drugs on Grammar School Children: “I want to
welcome you here today to ou7r hearing into Federal responsibility in
promoting the use of amphetamines to modify the behavior of grammar
school children.”… “ One of our witnesses today has been quoted as
saying that the use of this type of therapy will “zoom” from its
current usage in approximately 200,000 to 300,000 American children
today.”… “From the time of puberty onward, each and every child is
told that “speed kills” and that amphetamines are to be avoided. Yet
this same child has learned that Ritalin, for example, is the only
thing which makes him a functioning member of the school environment
and both his family and his doctor have urged the pills on him.”



Dr. Ronald Lipman, Chief of the Clinical Studies Section, FDA,
testified: “All I am saying is that hyperkinesis is frequently
something that brings the child into conflict with his parents, peers,
and teachers, and that the teacher observes behavior and has a
referral role to play, but, as you know, hyperkinesis is a medical
syndrome. It should be properly diagnosed by a medical doctor.”



Here, Lipman, speaking for the FDA, claims that “hyperkinesis”/
“minimal brain dysfunction” (forerunners of ADD, ADHD) is a medical
syndrome/a disease/an abnormality within the child, and he does so
with no scientific-medical proof whatsoever.



Mr. Gallagher (to Lipman): Then further you state, “I think the
results of the last few years of research will soon reach the Nation’s
doctors. The pediatricians will begin using them. In effect, what
will happen is it will zoom as word of its success spreads throughout
the Nation’s medical community.”



Dr. Lipman: “I didn’t use the term ‘zoom.’ I said it would probably
increase.”



Mr. Gallagher: “I think your enthusiasm led to the word ‘zoom.’”



In a letter to Chairman Gallagher of November 3, 1970, the Honorable
Elliot L. Richardson, Secretary, Department of Health Education and
Welfare (HEW) wrote: “As you notice stimulant drug treatment of
children with this disorder began in the late 1930’s and has been
widely accepted as safe and effective by the medical community.”



Here we have the Secretary of HEW, touting for the pharmaceutical
industry, assuring one and all: “We have no vested interest in the use
of any one treatment modality and are continuing to look for the most
effective treatments and treatment combinations for this disorder.”



Dr. John D. Griffith, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Vanderbilt
University School of Medicine, testified: “I would like to point out
that every drug, however innocuous, has some degree of toxicity. A
drug, therefore, is a type of poison and its poisonous qualities must
be carefully weighed against its therapeutic usefulness. A problem,
now being considered in most of the Capitols of the Free World, is
whether the benefits derived from Amphetamines outweigh their
toxicity. It is the consensus of the World Scientific Literature that
the Amphetamines are of very little benefit to mankind. They are,
however, quite toxic…after many years of clinical trials it is now
evident that this antidepressant effect of Amphetamines is very brief-
on the order of days. If a patient attempts to overcome this
tolerance to the drug, he runs the risk of becoming addicted and even
more depressed.”



INVENT CHEMICAL IMBALANCES TO RX. WITH CHEMICAL BALANCERS--PILLS



In 1980 the terms “hyperactivity”/ “minimal brain damage” and “minimal
brain dysfunction” were replaced by attention deficit disorder—ADD.
None, contrary to the testimony of Lipman were ever proved to be an
objective abnormality/abnormal phenotype/medical
syndrome/disorder/disease or “chemical imbalance. Incidence in 1980:
250 to 500 thousand.



In 1986 Nasrallah, et al [1], reported brain atrophy (CT scans) in
young adult males treated with amphetamines as children, and suggested
that the amphetamines caused it. Nasrallah, et al (1986) did
structural-anatomic computerized tomographic (CT) brain scans on
twenty-four adult males with a childhood history of
hyperkinesis/minimal brain dysfunction (HK/MBD—forerunner of ADHD),
all treated with stimulant drugs during childhood. Fifty-eight
percent (58%), fourteen of twenty-four, had brain atrophy, compared to
one of twenty-seven, controls (3.8 percent). They concluded: “… since
all of the HK/MBD patients had been treated with psychostimulants,
cortical atrophy may be a long-term adverse effect of this treatment.”



In the 1987 DSM-III-R [2], ADD became attention-deficit hyperactivity
disorder--ADHD. 8 of 14 behaviors were diagnostic! The epidemic:
500,000-750,000.



In 1994 DSM-IV [3], ADHD was re-conceptualized; now, six of the nine
behaviors diagnosed 3 subtypes. Still no “chemical imbalance,” no
proof the children were abnormal/diseased. Epidemic: approximately 2
million.



1994: Paul Leber, MD, Director, Division of Neuropharmacological Drug
Products,

FDA, writes me, December 22, 1994, stating: "that as yet no distinct
pathophysiology for the disorder (ADHD) has been delineated." This
is a plain and simple confession from the FDA that no such disease as
ADD/ADHD is known to exist. And yet they remain a party—a main
player—in the labeling and drugging of disease-free, normal American
children called “ADHD.”



In 1996, Schiller, of the Department of Education, and Jensen and
Swanson of the NIMH & CHADD [4], wrote: “Once parents and
teachers…recognize that children with ADD are not lazy or ‘bad’, but
have a biological disorder, they can stop blaming themselves…”



On October 8, 1996, ADHD expert, Lawrence Diller wrote to Mrs. Sue
Parry (to testify February 9, 2006 at the FDA): “The reason you have
been unable to obtain any articles presenting clear … evidence of a
physical or chemical abnormality… is.. there are none… the search for
a biological marker is doomed from the outset because of the
contradictions and ambiguities of the diagnostic construct of ADHD…



In 1993, I testified at the NIH: “If, as I am convinced, these
entities are not diseases, it would be unethical to initiate research
to evaluate biological interventions—unethical and fatally flawed
scientifically.” I neglected to say “contrary to the Hippocratic oath,
“criminal.”



On May, 13, 1998, F. Xavier Castellanos of the NIMH confessed by
letter to me: “… we have not yet met the burden of demonstrating the
specific pathophysiology that we believe underlies this condition.”



Opening the November 16-18, 1998, NIH, Consensus Conference on ADHD,
Steven E. Hyman, Director of the NIMH, posited: “ADHD affects from
0-3% in some school districts up to 40% in others… this cannot be
right.”



William B Carey, MD, [5], reporting on “Is ADHD a Valid Disorder?”
concluded: “What is…described as ADHD in the United States appears to
be a set of normal behavioral variations..."



Richard Degrandpre [6], author of Ritalin Nation, commenting on the
Report of the Panel, observed: “… it appears that you define disease
as a maladaptive cluster of characteristics. In the history of science
and medicine, this would not be a valid definition of disease.”
Failing to prove that ADHD is a disease, they seek to re-define the
word ‘disease’.



I testified at the Consensus Conference [7]: “Without an iota of proof
… the NIMH proclaims the … children “brain-diseased,” “abnormal.”
CHADD, funded by Ciba-Geigy, … has spread the “neuro-biological” lie.
The US Department of Education, absolving itself of controlling the
children and rendering them literate, coerces the labeling and
drugging…ADHD is a total, 100% fraud.”



SWANSON & CASTELLANOS WEAVE ILLUSIONS OF ADHD AS A DISEASE



Now, let us look at the structural-anatomic, CT and MRI brain scan
research from Nasrallah et al in 1986 through the ADHD Consensus
Conference, held at the National Institutes of Health, November 16-18,
1998, and to the present.



At the Consensus Conference, Swanson and Castellanos [8] reviewed the
structural-anatomic MRI literature--the only line of evidence, they
claimed, suggesting that ADHD was an actual disease, a brain disease.
They concluded: “Recent investigations provide converging evidence
that a refined phenotype of ADHD/HKD is characterized by reduced size
in specific neuroanatomical regions of the frontal lobes and basal
ganglia.” Nor did they (Swanson presenting) leave any doubt that they
were claiming that the brain atrophy was due to ADHD, the biological
basis of ADHD.



The 14 such studies Swanson and Castellanos reviewed at the Consensus
Conference [Hynd et al, (1990)[9], Hynd et al (1991)[10], Hynd et al,
(1993)[11], Giedd et al, (1994) [12], Castellanos et al, ( 1994)[13]
Semrud-Clikeman et al, (1994)[14], Baumgardner et al, (1996)[15],
Aylward et al, (1996)[16], Castellanos et al, (1996)[17], Filipek et
al,(1997)[18], Casey et al, (1997)[19], Mataro et al, (1997)[20],
Berquin et al, (1998)[21], and Mostofsky et al, (1998)[22] all scanned
ADHD-treated subjects—never an ADHD untreated group, proving, time and
again, that the treatment/drugs, not the never-validated “disease”
ADHD, was the cause of the brain atrophy. Two of these studies did
not report whether the ADHD subjects were medicated or not and one
did not report clearly. Leo and Cohen [23] estimate that 247 of the
259 total ADHD subjects in these studies--95%--had been medicated
(“ADHD-medicated”).



Nonetheless, in virtually all of these studies, the journal titles,
abstracts, conclusions, and their attendant press releases, crow the
finding of brain atrophy/shrinkage and insisted, time and again, they
were the proof that ADHD is a brain disease, never saying a
word--except in the fine print of the full manuscript--that virtually
all of the subjects were treated (ADHD-treated) and, of course that
their treatment with the poisons--Ritalin and the amphetamines--not
the never validated “disease” ADHD was surely the cause of their brain
atrophy.



When Swanson had finished his Consensus Conference presentation, not
saying a word about the “treated” status of virtually all of the ADHD
subjects in the studies reviewed, I took a floor microphone and asked:
“Dr. Swanson, why didn’t you mention that virtually all of the ADHD
subjects in the neuroimaging studies have been on chronic stimulant
therapy and that this is the likely cause of their brain atrophy?”
Swanson: “…this is a critical issue and in fact I am planning a study
to investigate that.” (See the official, NIH video of the Consensus
Conference or the video I have produced: ADHD—Total, 100% Fraud)



With no proof of a biological basis for ADHD, the final statement of
the Consensus Conference Panel, November 18, 1998, was a necessary
confession: “ ...we do not have an independent, valid test for ADHD,
and there are no data to indicate that ADHD is due to a brain
malfunction.” [24]



The discovery that this or that real disease no longer exists would be
the end of most epidemics, but not so with ADHD. The phenomenal ADHD
epidemic stood at 4-4.5 million at the time the 1998, Consensus
Conference came to the conclusion “there are no data to indicate that
ADHD is due to a brain malfunction.” Not so with polio and its
eradication by the vaccine of Dr. Jonas Salk. But here we speak of a
real disease, of which there are none in psychiatry





A January, 2000, Readers Digest article [25] “Castellanos and his
group found three areas of the brain to be significantly smaller in
ADHD kids than in normal children…Some critics claim that such brain
differences in ADHD children might actually be caused by Ritalin…To
address this, Castellanos has now embarked on another study, imaging
the brains of ADHD youngsters who have not been treated with drugs.”
From Nasrallah in 1986 to 2000, and finally, Castellanos and the NIMH
were going to do a valid study, they would scan children not drugged,
not poisoned. They might, at long last, learn whether or not ADHD
children were different than normal children—something they had never
proved. Might they prove it now?



STILL REFUSING TO DO VALID RESEARCH



On October 9, 2002, Castellanos et al [26] reported: “…the first
neuroimaging study ( the first in all of the MRI literature,
1986-2002) to our knowledge to include a substantial number (n = 49)
of previously unmedicated children and adolescents with ADHD.” Here
we have a confession there has never in 16 years of brain scanning
been a study of an ADHD-unmedicated group of patients. The 49
ADHD-unmedicated subjects had a mean age of 8.3 years vs. the 139
controls with whom they were compared, with a mean age of 10.5 years;
2.2 years younger! How could the ADHD-unmedicated subjects not be
smaller, overall? How could they not have smaller bodies, heads,
brains? Next, they compared ADHD-medicated (n = 103) to
ADHD-unmedicated (n = 49) subjects. The ADHD-unmedicated subjects,
mean age 8.3 years, were 2.6 years younger than the ADHD-medicated
subjects, mean age 10.9, years. Nor were these two groups suitable
for comparison. But this did not stop Castellanos, et al from
concluding, as it was predetermined that they should, that: (1) “…the
cerebrum as a whole and the cerebellum (essentially, the whole brain)
are smaller in children and adolescents with predominantly combined
type ADHD,” or, (2) “Conversely, we have no evidence that stimulant
drugs cause abnormal brain development,” neither conclusion justified
given that none of the comparisons were valid.



Once again, as throughout 16 years of MRI brain scanning research
(1996-98), Castellanos, and the NIMH refused to do a valid study, the
comparison of a group of ADHD- untreated to a truly matched group of
normal controls. A truly matched control group could have been
constituted, but was not. Rather, since the 1986, Nasrallah study,
they have known that Ritalin-amphetamine treatment induces brain
atrophy and they have proven this time-after-time, obscuring however
possible their “treated”/“drugged” status while consistently
representing that the atrophy produced is, instead, due to ADHD, the
abnormality of the brain confirming it is a disease, a brain disease.



Starting with an always-subjective behavioral-emotional, DSM
construct, their biological-medical research is destined never to
prove a thing. Instead, in this study and in all such studies in
“biological psychiatry” the only abnormalities found—and they are
real—are those induced by the brain-damaging drugs they are invariably
put on.



In fact the entire ADHD-MRI literature, all of it showing atrophy of
the brain and brain parts, all of it performed on stimulant-treated
subjects is proof, replicated time and again, that these
methylphenidate and amphetamines, not the never-validated “brain
disease” ADHD, are the cause of the brain atrophy.



The 2003 study of Sowell et al, [27] showed brain atrophy but once
again failed to include an ADHD-untreated group. Can there be any
doubt that the their market plan is to scan ADHD-treated subjects,
knowing they will find brain atrophy, say little or nothing about the
fact of their treatment and then represent, in all but the finest
print, the brain atrophy to be the “proof “ that ADHD is a “disease.”



The 2003 review of Leo and Cohen [23] lead them to conclude: “We found
that most subjects diagnosed with ADD or ADHD had prior medication
use, often for several months or years. This substantial confound
invalidates any suggestion of ADHD-specific neuropathology. Moreover,
the few recent studies using unmedicated subjects have inexplicably
avoided making straightforward comparisons of these subjects with
controls.”



In other words they have purposely avoided doing valid scientific
research. Why? When will they be made to answer? What is the bounty
for illusions of ADHD the “disease”?



A CONFESSION: NO SUCH THING AS A PSYCHIATRIC DISEASE

  #2  
Old February 9th 06, 06:07 PM posted to misc.health.alternative,misc.kids.health,talk.politics.medicine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FDA-KNOWING WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD


Ilena wrote in message ...

Cut and paste addicts require special medication. Ritalin might work.

Did you know that the probability of people who eat grits having black
babies is three to one. It's another secret by the whoevers. Equal
opportunity requires that either all eat grits or none eat grits.


  #3  
Old February 10th 06, 12:41 AM posted to misc.health.alternative,misc.kids.health,talk.politics.medicine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FDA-KNOWING WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD

vernon wrote:
Ilena wrote in message ...

Cut and paste addicts require special medication. Ritalin might work.

Did you know that the probability of people who eat grits having black
babies is three to one. It's another secret by the whoevers. Equal
opportunity requires that either all eat grits or none eat grits.


The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman, who is affiliated with with
the Tom Crude/John Revolta Kriminal Kult of $cientology.

Interestingly, the bilge that was posted formed the basis of five
lawsuits a few years ago. The thrust of these suits was that Novartis
(the patent holder on Ritalin (which is widely available as a
generic)),CHADD, the American Psychological Association, and other
secret organizations, conspired to create the diagnosis of AD/HD just to
sell medications to people diagnosed with it.

Two of the suits were thrown out after the defendants moved for summary
judgment because the plaintiffs failed to state a claim where relief can
be granted, and the other three were withdrawn, as the lawyers saw their
payday disappear.

  #4  
Old February 10th 06, 12:52 AM posted to misc.health.alternative,misc.kids.health,talk.politics.medicine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FDA-KNOWING WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD


"Mark Probert wrote


vernon wrote:


snip

Ilena wrote in message
...


The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman


snip

Do prove that the FDA was not a WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD.




  #5  
Old February 10th 06, 01:08 AM posted to misc.health.alternative,misc.kids.health,talk.politics.medicine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FDA-KNOWING WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD

JanD wrote:
"Mark Probert wrote


vernon wrote:


snip

Ilena wrote in message
...


The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman


snip

Do prove that the FDA was not a WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD.


The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman, who is affiliated with with
the Tom Crude/John Revolta Kriminal Kult of $cientology.

Interestingly, the bilge that was posted formed the basis of five
lawsuits a few years ago. The thrust of these suits was that Novartis
(the patent holder on Ritalin (which is widely available as a
generic)),CHADD, the American Psychological Association, and other
secret organizations, conspired to create the diagnosis of AD/HD just to
sell medications to people diagnosed with it.

Two of the suits were thrown out after the defendants moved for summary
judgment because the plaintiffs failed to state a claim where relief can
be granted, and the other three were withdrawn, as the lawyers saw their
payday disappear.

As for your request, those who claimed it could not prove it when the
defendants demanded an offer of proof.

Thus, their suit was tossed in the dung heap outside of the courtroom
where it belonged.


  #6  
Old February 10th 06, 02:56 AM posted to misc.health.alternative,misc.kids.health,talk.politics.medicine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FDA-KNOWING WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD


"JanD" wrote in message
news:iBQGf.545018$084.158549@attbi_s22...

"Mark Probert wrote


vernon wrote:


snip

Ilena wrote in message
...


The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman


snip

Do prove that the FDA was not a WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD.


One need only investigate the members of FDA (appointed) to determine that
they are no bright enough to create fraud or be part of a conspiracy.

Of course there is one level worse, the people who think the FDA has
intellect.
A moron looks bright to a monkey, or is it a trained ape looks bright to the
moron.


  #7  
Old February 10th 06, 07:07 AM posted to misc.health.alternative,misc.kids.health,talk.politics.medicine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FDA-KNOWING WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD


"Mark Probert wrote:
JanD wrote:
"Mark Probert wrote


vernon wrote:


snip

Ilena wrote in message
...


The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman


snip

Do prove that the FDA was not a WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD.


The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman,



As for your request, those who claimed it could not prove it when the
defendants demanded an offer of proof.


This is another diversion.

YOU are doubting it. YOU prove it.

Lawsuits were NOT mentioned!




  #8  
Old February 10th 06, 03:47 PM posted to misc.health.alternative,misc.kids.health,talk.politics.medicine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FDA-KNOWING WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD

JanD wrote:
"Mark Probert wrote:
JanD wrote:
"Mark Probert wrote


vernon wrote:
snip

Ilena wrote in message
...


The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman
snip

Do prove that the FDA was not a WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD.

The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman,


As for your request, those who claimed it could not prove it when the
defendants demanded an offer of proof.


This is another diversion.

YOU are doubting it. YOU prove it.

Lawsuits were NOT mentioned!


Fred Baughman was. It was the same crap he foisted on the law firms.

'nuf said.

The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman, who is affiliated with with
the Tom Crude/John Revolta Kriminal Kult of $cientology.

Interestingly, the bilge that was posted formed the basis of five
lawsuits a few years ago. The thrust of these suits was that Novartis
(the patent holder on Ritalin (which is widely available as a
generic)),CHADD, the American Psychological Association, and other
secret organizations, conspired to create the diagnosis of AD/HD just to
sell medications to people diagnosed with it.

Two of the suits were thrown out after the defendants moved for summary
judgment because the plaintiffs failed to state a claim where relief can
be granted, and the other three were withdrawn, as the lawyers saw their
payday disappear.

As for your request, those who claimed it could not prove it when the
defendants demanded an offer of proof.

Thus, their suit was tossed in the dung heap outside of the courtroom
where it belonged.
  #9  
Old February 10th 06, 08:15 PM posted to misc.health.alternative,misc.kids.health,talk.politics.medicine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FDA-KNOWING WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD


Thanks for proving, you did NOTHING but divert, as usual.

AND:

YOU can NOT prove the FDA was not a WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD.


Mark Probert blathered again:
JanD wrote:
"Mark Probert wrote:
JanD wrote:
"Mark Probert wrote


vernon wrote:
snip

Ilena wrote in message
...


The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman
snip

Do prove that the FDA was not a WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD.
The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman,


As for your request, those who claimed it could not prove it when the
defendants demanded an offer of proof.


This is another diversion.

YOU are doubting it. YOU prove it.

Lawsuits were NOT mentioned!


Fred Baughman was. It was the same crap he foisted on the law firms.

'nuf said.



  #10  
Old February 10th 06, 10:49 PM posted to misc.health.alternative,misc.kids.health,talk.politics.medicine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default FDA-KNOWING WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD

JanD wrote:
Thanks for proving, you did NOTHING but divert, as usual.


I addressed the person who you mentioned, and what the bilge he wrote
meant in context of reality.

Fred Baughman was. It was the same crap he foisted on the law firms.

'nuf said.

The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman, who is affiliated with with
the Tom Crude/John Revolta Kriminal Kult of $cientology.

Interestingly, the bilge that was posted formed the basis of five
lawsuits a few years ago. The thrust of these suits was that Novartis
(the patent holder on Ritalin (which is widely available as a
generic)),CHADD, the American Psychological Association, and other
secret organizations, conspired to create the diagnosis of AD/HD just to
sell medications to people diagnosed with it.

Two of the suits were thrown out after the defendants moved for summary
judgment because the plaintiffs failed to state a claim where relief can
be granted, and the other three were withdrawn, as the lawyers saw their
payday disappear.

As for your request, those who claimed it could not prove it when the
defendants demanded an offer of proof.

Thus, their suit was tossed in the dung heap outside of the courtroom
where it belonged.


AND:

YOU can NOT prove the FDA was not a WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD.


Mark Probert blathered again:
JanD wrote:
"Mark Probert wrote:
JanD wrote:
"Mark Probert wrote


vernon wrote:
snip

Ilena wrote in message
...


The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman
snip

Do prove that the FDA was not a WILLFUL PARTY TO THE ADHD FRAUD.
The cut an paste is from Dr. Fred Baughman,
As for your request, those who claimed it could not prove it when the
defendants demanded an offer of proof.
This is another diversion.

YOU are doubting it. YOU prove it.

Lawsuits were NOT mentioned!

Fred Baughman was. It was the same crap he foisted on the law firms.

'nuf said.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Data Refute Claims of ADHD Overmedication, Congress Told Mark Probert Kids Health 0 March 26th 05 12:23 AM
Some key vaccination fraud history (and Schroeder's SLAPP) Todd Gastaldo Pregnancy 0 November 15th 04 04:43 PM
Letter to APA 5/03 dubunking BS ADHD SickofCrazyBS Kids Health 0 November 25th 03 06:48 AM
Vagina-related insurance fraud (Dan Fitz. at The Hartford, you're removed) Todd Gastaldo Pregnancy 0 November 1st 03 05:20 PM
The largest insurance fraud (medical birth) Todd Gastaldo Pregnancy 0 October 29th 03 10:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.