we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    • Columbine mass-killer Eric Harris was taking Luvox – like Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft, Effexor and many others, a modern and widely prescribed type of antidepressant drug called selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs. Harris and fellow student Dylan Klebold went on a hellish school shooting rampage in 1999 during which they killed 12 students and a teacher and wounded 24 others before turning their guns on themselves.Luvox manufacturer Solvay Pharmaceuticals concedes that during short-term controlled clinical trials, 4 percent of children and youth taking Luvox – that’s 1 in 25 – developed mania, a dangerous and violence-prone mental derangement characterized by extreme excitement and delusion.
    • Patrick Purdy went on a schoolyard shooting rampage in Stockton, Calif., in 1989, which became the catalyst for the original legislative frenzy to ban “semiautomatic assault weapons” in California and the nation. The 25-year-old Purdy, who murdered five children and wounded 30, had been on Amitriptyline, an antidepressant, as well as the antipsychotic drug Thorazine.
    • Kip Kinkel, 15, murdered his parents in 1998 and the next day went to his school, Thurston High in Springfield, Ore., and opened fire on his classmates, killing two and wounding 22 others. He had been prescribed both Prozac and Ritalin.
    • In 1988, 31-year-old Laurie Dann went on a shooting rampage in a second-grade classroom in Winnetka, Ill., killing one child and wounding six. She had been taking the antidepressant Anafranil as well as Lithium, long used to treat mania.
    • In Paducah, Ky., in late 1997, 14-year-old Michael Carneal, son of a prominent attorney, traveled to Heath High School and started shooting students in a prayer meeting taking place in the school’s lobby, killing three and leaving another paralyzed. Carneal reportedly was on Ritalin.
    • In 2005, 16-year-old Native American Jeff Weise, living on Minnesota’s Red Lake Indian Reservation, shot and killed nine people and wounded five others before killing himself. Weise had been taking Prozac.
    • In another famous case, 47-year-old Joseph T. Wesbecker, just a month after he began taking Prozac in 1989, shot 20 workers at Standard Gravure Corp. in Louisville, Ky., killing nine. Prozac-maker Eli Lilly later settled a lawsuit brought by survivors.
    • Kurt Danysh, 18, shot his own father to death in 1996, a little more than two weeks after starting on Prozac. Danysh’s description of own his mental-emotional state at the time of the murder is chilling: “I didn’t realize I did it until after it was done,” Danysh said. “This might sound weird, but it felt like I had no control of what I was doing, like I was left there just holding a gun.”
    • John Hinckley, age 25, took four Valium two hours before shooting and almost killing President Ronald Reagan in 1981. In the assassination attempt, Hinckley also wounded press secretary James Brady, Secret Service agent Timothy McCarthy and policeman Thomas Delahanty.
    • Andrea Yates, in one of the most heartrending crimes in modern history, drowned all five of her children – aged 7 years down to 6 months – in a bathtub. Insisting inner voices commanded her to kill her children, she had become increasingly psychotic over the course of several years. At her 2006 murder re-trial (after a 2002 guilty verdict was overturned on appeal), Yates’ longtime friend Debbie Holmes testified: “She asked me if I thought Satan could read her mind and if I believed in demon possession.” And Dr. George Ringholz, after evaluating Yates for two days, recounted an experience she had after the birth of her first child: “What she described was feeling a presence … Satan … telling her to take a knife and stab her son Noah,” Ringholz said, adding that Yates’ delusion at the time of the bathtub murders was not only that she had to kill her children to save them, but that Satan had entered her and that she had to be executed in order to kill Satan.Yates had been taking the antidepressant Effexor. In November 2005, more than four years after Yates drowned her children, Effexor manufacturer Wyeth Pharmaceuticals quietly added “homicidal ideation” to the drug’s list of “rare adverse events.” The Medical Accountability Network, a private nonprofit focused on medical ethics issues, publicly criticized Wyeth, saying Effexor’s “homicidal ideation” risk wasn’t well-publicized and that Wyeth failed to send letters to doctors or issue warning labels announcing the change.And what exactly does “rare” mean in the phrase “rare adverse events”? The FDA defines it as occurring in less than one in 1,000 people. But since that same year 19.2 million prescriptions for Effexor were filled in the U.S., statistically that means thousands of Americans might experience “homicidal ideation” – murderous thoughts – as a result of taking just this one brand of antidepressant drug.Effexor is Wyeth’s best-selling drug, by the way, which in one recent year brought in over $3 billion in sales, accounting for almost a fifth of the company’s annual revenues.
    • One more case is instructive, that of 12-year-old Christopher Pittman, who struggled in court to explain why he murdered his grandparents, who had provided the only love and stability he’d ever known in his turbulent life. “When I was lying in my bed that night,” he testified, “I couldn’t sleep because my voice in my head kept echoing through my mind telling me to kill them.” Christopher had been angry with his grandfather, who had disciplined him earlier that day for hurting another student during a fight on the school bus. So later that night, he shot both of his grandparents in the head with a .410 shotgun as they slept and then burned down their South Carolina home, where he had lived with them.”I got up, got the gun, and I went upstairs and I pulled the trigger,” he recalled. “Through the whole thing, it was like watching your favorite TV show. You know what is going to happen, but you can’t do anything to stop it.”Pittman’s lawyers would later argue that the boy had been a victim of “involuntary intoxication,” since his doctors had him taking the antidepressants Paxil and Zoloft just prior to the murders.Paxil’s known “adverse drug reactions” – according to the drug’s FDA-approved label – include “mania,” “insomnia,” “anxiety,” “agitation,” “confusion,” “amnesia,” “depression,” “paranoid reaction,” “psychosis,” “hostility,” “delirium,” “hallucinations,” “abnormal thinking,” “depersonalization” and “lack of emotion,” among others.The preceding examples are only a few of the best-known offenders who had been taking prescribed psychiatric drugs before committing their violent crimes – there are many others.
    • Whether we like to admit it or not, it is undeniable that when certain people living on the edge of sanity take psychiatric medications, those drugs can – and occasionally do – push them over the edge into violent madness. Remember, every single SSRI antidepressant sold in the United States of America today, no matter what brand or manufacturer, bears a “black box” FDA warning label – the government’s most serious drug warning – of “increased risks of suicidal thinking and behavior, known as suicidality, in young adults ages 18 to 24.” Common sense tells us that where there are suicidal thoughts – especially in a very, very angry person – homicidal thoughts may not be far behind. Indeed, the mass shooters we are describing often take their own lives when the police show up, having planned their suicide ahead of time.


    Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/the-giant-gaping-hole-in-sandy-hook-reporting/#OJbMWA07ci4QTRQ8.99

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    Of course the left would rather ignore and focus on taking guns away from law abiding citizens

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    The relationship between mental illness and violent behavior is complex. Knowing that someone has a mental illness is, by itself, no justification for assuming that person may be dangerous. In fact, people with severe mental illness are far more likely to be the victims of violence than the perpetrators of it.

    According to the CDC, approximately half of Americans will experience some form of mental illness at some point during their lifetime. Therefore, people experiencing some form of mental illness are all around us. Those with the potential to commit the kind of devastating harm Lanza did, however, are, thankfully, extremely rare. Adapting mental health policies around individuals like Lanza, then, is not efficient and not likely to be effective. Controlling access to certain weapons, however, would have far-reaching benefits for all of us.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    In response to UserName99's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The relationship between mental illness and violent behavior is complex. Knowing that someone has a mental illness is, by itself, no justification for assuming that person may be dangerous. In fact, people with severe mental illness are far more likely to be the victims of violence than the perpetrators of it.

    According to the CDC, approximately half of Americans will experience some form of mental illness at some point during their lifetime. Therefore, people experiencing some form of mental illness are all around us. Those with the potential to commit the kind of devastating harm Lanza did, however, are, thankfully, extremely rare. Adapting mental health policies around individuals like Lanza, then, is not efficient and not likely to be effective. Controlling access to certain weapons, however, would have far-reaching benefits for all of us.

    [/QUOTE]

    Unbeleiveable.  Don't address the issue, just say it is too complex to consider.  Better to deny people the right to defend themselves.

    This is an example of the logic of the left.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    [/QUOTE]

    Unbeleiveable.  Don't address the issue, just say it is too complex to consider.  Better to deny people the right to defend themselves.

    This is an example of the logic of the left.

    [/QUOTE]

    OK...in your mind, what is the issue and what solution would you provide?

     

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    In response to UserName99's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to skeeter20's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    [/QUOTE]

    Unbeleiveable.  Don't address the issue, just say it is too complex to consider.  Better to deny people the right to defend themselves.

    This is an example of the logic of the left.

    [/QUOTE]

    OK...in your mind, what is the issue and what solution would you provide? 

    [/QUOTE]

    The fact that virtually all these killers were on some type of anti-depressant or stimulant (ritalin and/or adderal) demands a reassessment of these drugs availability and how healthcare professionals treat behavioral or mental disorders in regards to these drugs in conjunction with possible therapy and monitoring the patients progress much more closely and perhaps training healthcare providers in identifying and a real system for pro-active reporting of negative changes!!

     

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    The only problem with this analysis is that conservatives will undoubtedly block the increased mental health funding necessary to address the issue as vehemently as they fight against reasonable gun regulation.

    Double the blood on your hands.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    In response to UserName99's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The only problem with this analysis is that conservatives will undoubtedly block the increased mental health funding necessary to address the issue as vehemently as they fight against reasonable gun regulation.

    Double the blood on your hands.

    [/QUOTE]
    How about the massive unregulated use of these SSRI drugs by Big Pharma, which has been in bed with the Obama Administration since selling out for billions in loot under ObamaCare in 2009?

    Those who have suicidal side effects from these drugs are 'collateral damage'. Dont expect the crooked Obama 'regulators" to pressure their cronies at Big Pharma.

    Big Pharma now is practically a government entity...

    On Friday House Republicans released more documents that expose the collusion between the health-care industry and the White House that produced ObamaCare, and what a story of crony capitalism it is. If the trove of emails proves anything, it’s that the Tea Party isn’t angry enough.

    The business refrain in those days was that if you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu. But it turns out Big Pharma was also serving as head chef, maître d’hotel and dishwasher. Though some parts of the story have been reported before, the emails make clear that ObamaCare might never have passed without the drug companies. Thank you, Pfizer.

    According to the trove of e-mails that the WSJ published today, there appears to be a direct quid pro quo payoff to the drug companies for some badly-needed PR efforts on behalf of the administration, in exchange for limiting the amount that Congress would seize from drug companies.

    Within the US, pharmaceutical firms which sense an opportunity to regularly sell drugs to the government at arbitrarily high prices support the nationalisation of the healthcare sector thus highlighting the fact that socialism and crony-capitalism go hand in hand. Today, the most expensive drugs are those that enjoy government protection and are listed as prescription drugs. It is common for the price of these drugs to dramatically fall by as much as ninety percent when they are recategorized as over-the-counter drugs and face competition in the marketplace

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    CLC forgets the ginormous, unfunded Medicare Part D Prescription drug program passed under Bush...

    ...which was the largest single entitlement ever enacted at the time (adding a trillion or so to the deficit to boot)...

    ...and effectively cemented Big Pharma as a "govt entity" with its own veto power over negotiating drug prices.

    It took Obamacare to close the 'donut hole' between cost and price for tens of millions of elderly citizens. 

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    The desire to mainstream people leads to terrible crimes likes those listed.  In addition, antipsychotic drugs are too easily prescribed by General Practitioners when prescribing these drugs needs high level decision making for prescribing and monitoring of their effectiveness by psychiatrists

    The pendulum has swung too far and we need to rethink institutionalizing some people who can't function in society.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The desire to mainstream people leads to terrible crimes likes those listed.  In addition, antipsychotic drugs are too easily prescribed by General Practitioners when prescribing these drugs needs high level decision making for prescribing and monitoring of their effectiveness by psychiatrists

    The pendulum has swung too far and we need to rethink institutionalizing some people who can't function in society.

    [/QUOTE]

    Have you seen the typical insurance coverages for mental health?  They're a bad joke.  And psychiatry?  Fuhgeddaboutit...

    Insititutionalization?  Who's going to pay for it?  Even if it did work in most cases (it doesn't), there isn't nearly enough public support to get it funded.  That only works for black men who sell drugs and priviatized prison systems, i.e. the narco-state and the "keep-that-n-away-from-my-daughter"-state.

    I think part of the issue is cultural with the idea that people (especially young men) need to work through their problems on their own and "be a man" or "suck it up".  It don't work that way.  Never did.  We can't put them all in jail, the army or an asylum.

     

     

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    In response to Newtster's comment:

    [/QUOTE]

    You get dumber by the day.

    Psychotropic drugs have known side effects for young adults that include increased aggression and suicide and you come up with some bullshiite on statins?

     [/QUOTE]

    He defends everything he sees the dems support and opposes everything he sees the dems oppose. He's like a fvcking robot and they love him for it!!

     

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    He defends everything he sees the dems support and opposes everything he sees the dems oppose. He's like a fvcking robot and they love him for it!! 


    So spanky, simple question....

    Anyone who is on medication, no matter what the side effects, should be allowed to own guns...as long as that medication isn't on some yet unamed list? 

    [/QUOTE]

    When did I sday anything about any law abiding citizen not being allowed to own guns?

    I said in conjunction with a discussion on gun control we should discuss the very real fact that a vast majority were on anti-depression and other mental medications or shortly stopped taking these drugs before killing people!!

    You are a tool so, do not feel you need to answer this or any of my posts!

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Hey wingnuts, ever hear of 'roid rage'?

    How about people who abuse presription pain killers?

    [/QUOTE]

    The risk of gun death in America is off the charts compared to the civilized world.  They must not have medications there.

    Or maybe its the guns?

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

    [/QUOTE]

    So US is the only country with gun ownership? Switzerland gun ownership is pretty high and they also have medications yet don't have the mass shootings we have. There is something more going on here that is causing this sh!t to happen. I don't know what it is but I do know it not JUST because guns are available. Guns have been availalble for centuries yet these mass shootings are fairly new. 

    So please stop with blaming it all on the guns. Something is causing people to snap and it's not the guns that are causing it. Again, not sure what it is, but I know what it ain't

    If it were JUST because guns are available then why isn't every gun owner shooting up schools, theaters, and malls???

    [/QUOTE]

    I do not belive it is ONE thing. I know dems like to blame guns and ignore everything else and conservatives want NO restrictions on guns.

    I think there should be an overall discussion on guns, medications,  how violence saturating our lives through video, media , music and virutally every other way affects young people.

    We need to look at it all. It seems the same with dems everytime, throw a patch on, throw more money at it or blame something/someone else for it. They never want to address the real issues. Not sure what they are afraid of but, it's sad.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: we need to have this discussion as well! Probably too many big campaign donors for it to happen though!

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    CLC forgets the ginormous, unfunded Medicare Part D Prescription drug program passed under Bush...

    ...which was the largest single entitlement ever enacted at the time (adding a trillion or so to the deficit to boot)...

    ...and effectively cemented Big Pharma as a "govt entity" with its own veto power over negotiating drug prices.

    It took Obamacare to close the 'donut hole' between cost and price for tens of millions of elderly citizens.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Donut hole? That is your answer? The ultimate inside lobbyist corruption of mega corporations that progressives rant about, with their alleged principles...and ignored because, hey,  ObamaCare closed the 'donut hole'...

    As laughable as the progressive defense of Obama drone strikes...


    Congrats, that post cements your lead as the #1 loyal Obama toadie on boston.com...the competition here is tough, but you admirably soldier on with your excess slobbering.

     

     

Share