Posts Tagged ‘medicine’

20130528-220905.jpgWhen “20% of all American kids have a mental disorder” (sic) and psychiatrists diagnose ADHD differently on a massive scale, 9% of American kids vs. less than 0.5% of French kids, what does that tell us? Listen below…

See also: Why French kids don’t have ADHD?“, as published in Psychology Today. Note the extract & bold portions below.

French child psychiatrists don’t use the same system of classification of childhood emotional problems as American psychiatrists. They do not use the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or “DSM”.

To the extent that French clinicians are successful at finding and repairing what has gone awry in the child’s social context, fewer children qualify for the ADHD diagnosis. Moreover, the definition of ADHD is not as broad as in the American system, which, in my view, tends to “pathologize” much of what is normal childhood behavior. The DSM specifically does not consider underlying causes. It thus leads clinicians to give the ADHD diagnosis to a much larger number of symptomatic children, while also encouraging them to treat those children with pharmaceuticals.

The French holistic, psycho-social approach also allows for considering nutritional causes for ADHD-type symptoms—specifically the fact that the behavior of some children is worsened after eating foods with artificial colors, certain preservatives, and/or allergens.

And then, of course, there are the vastly different philosophies of child-rearing in the United States and France. These divergent philosophies could account for why French children are generally better-behaved than their American counterparts. Pamela Druckerman highlights the divergent parenting styles in her recent book, Bringing up Bébé. I believe her insights are relevant to a discussion of why French children are not diagnosed with ADHD in anything like the numbers we are seeing in the United States.

From the time their children are born, French parents provide them with a firm cadre—the word means “frame” or “structure.” Children are not allowed, for example, to snack whenever they want. Mealtimes are at four specific times of the day. French children learn to wait patiently for meals, rather than eating snack foods whenever they feel like it. French babies, too, are expected to conform to limits set by parents and not by their crying selves. French parents let their babies “cry it out” if they are not sleeping through the night at the age of four months.

French parents, Druckerman observes, love their children just as much as American parents. They give them piano lessons, take them to sports practice, and encourage them to make the most of their talents. But French parents have a different philosophy of discipline. Consistently enforced limits, in the French view, make children feel safe and secure. Clear limits, they believe, actually make a child feel happier and safer—something that is congruent with my own experience as both a therapist and a parent. Finally, French parents believe that hearing the word “no” rescues children from the “tyranny of their own desires.” And spanking, when used judiciously, is not considered child abuse in France.

As a therapist who works with children, it makes perfect sense to me that French children don’t need medications to control their behavior because they learn self-control early in their lives. The children grow up in families in which the rules are well-understood, and a clear family hierarchy is firmly in place. In French families, as Druckerman describes them, parents are firmly in charge of their kids—instead of the American family style, in which the situation is all too often vice versa.

AlbertMohler.com – The Briefing. Listen to full audio here.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Watch the video below. Really, what does it make you think about the times we’re living in?

July 11, 2012 – In the neo-natal intensive care unit at the East Tennessee Children’s Hospital in Knoxville, nurses give baby Grayson morphine every three hours to help ease his painful withdrawal symptoms.

“He’s currently on 160 micrograms,” said nurse Andrew Pressnell.

Other newborn babies shake and scream as nurses rush to administer care around the clock. Nearly half of the infants in the hospital’s NICU are suffering from opiate withdrawal — most from prescription painkillers.

Baby Grayson was quaking when he was admitted to the hospitals NICU at just 48 hours old. He was born with a serious drug dependency because his pregnant mother was addicted to painkillers. Grayson was brought to Children’s Hospital from another hospital to wait for a spot in its special unit for newborns detoxing from painkillers. This specialized unit, just for babies going through withdrawal, is now full.

In fact, out of the 58 babies in the hospital’s NICU, 23 of them are going through withdrawal from prescription pills, including OxyContin, Vicodin and methadone.

“I know people probably think I exaggerate when I say they have this very fearful look in their eyes, well they do,” said Carla Saunders, the NICU’s head nurse.

Saunders is helping develop a treatment program for these newborns by using a powerful combination of drugs, trial and error, and lots of love and care. It can take weeks, even months, for these tiny bodies to withdrawal from whatever their mothers were hooked on. It costs $53,000 per baby to wean them, and 60 percent of the cases are on Medicaid.

Saunders said she used to go home in tears after watching the newborns suffer, but over time, she has grown accustomed to it. She now pours her emotions into helping the little ones.

“When I started, you maybe had a withdrawal baby once in a while and then it was once a month, and then it was once a week and then it was once a day,” she said. “We got six this weekend, all at one time, within almost 48 hours.” – Source

If your parents can’t remember anyone trying to or committing suicide & you and all your friends do… what does that mean? Why is that so? Add your view as a comment below.

Is suicide common among children and young people? In 2007, suicide was the third leading cause of death for young people ages 15 to 24. An estimated 11 nonfatal suicide attempts occur per every suicide death. – Source

Check out Line of Fire Radio. Listen to full audio here. Audio segment here.


Grief could soon be a “disorder” according to the new version of the DSM. Great, now more people can get drugs for trying to deal with more things that it won’t help for. That way the poor drug companies can get more cash & we can employ lots more ‘professionals’ to give them business. Forgive my sarcasm. It’s a scam. Note how thin that first DSM in the photo is. Wonder why it ‘grew’ so much…?

When does a broken heart become a diagnosis? In a bitter skirmish over the definition of depression, a new report contends that a proposed change to the diagnosis would characterize grieving as a disorder and greatly increase the number of people treated for it.  The criteria for depression are being reviewed by the American Psychiatric Association, which is finishing work on the fifth edition of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or D.S.M., the first since 1994. The manual is the standard reference for the field, shaping treatment and insurance decisions, and its revisions will affect the lives of millions of people for years to come.

From: Grief Could Join List of Disorders – New York Times

AlbertMohler.com, The Briefing. Listen to full audio here.

The benefits of being able to extend another life with the unused parts of your body seem obvious – although I’m not necessarily endorsing that either – we need to work these moral issues out for ourselves. The concern here is if we are sure those ‘parts of your body’ are really unused & unnecessary according to the tests commonly used to certify death?

Becoming an organ donor seems like a win-win situation. Some 3.3 people on the transplant waiting list will have their lives extended by your gift (3.3 is the average yield of solid organs per donor). You’re a hero, and at no real cost, apparently.

But what are you giving up when you check the donor box on your license? Your organs, of course – but much more. You’re also giving up your right to informed consent. Doctors don’t have to tell you or your relatives what they will do to your body during an organ harvest operation because you’ll be dead, with no legal rights.

The most likely donors are victims of head trauma (from, say, a car or motorcycle accident), spontaneous bleeding in the head, or an aneurysm – patients who can be ruled dead based on brain-death criteria. But brain deaths are estimated to be just around 1% of the total. Everyone else dies from failure of the heart, circulation and breathing, which leads the organs to deteriorate quickly.

The current criteria on brain death were set by a Harvard Medical School committee in 1968, at a time when organ transplantation was making great strides. In 1981, the Uniform Determination of Death Act made brain death a legal form of death in all 50 states.

The exam for brain death is simple. A doctor splashes ice water in your ears (to look for shivering in the eyes), pokes your eyes with a cotton swab and checks for any gag reflex, among other rudimentary tests. It takes less time than a standard eye exam. Finally, in what’s called the apnea test, the ventilator is disconnected to see if you can breathe unassisted. If not, you are brain dead. (Some or all of the above tests are repeated hours later for confirmation.)

Here’s the weird part. If you fail the apnea test, your respirator is reconnected. You will begin to breathe again, your heart pumping blood, keeping the organs fresh. Doctors like to say that, at this point, the “person” has departed the body. You will now be called a BHC, or beating-heart cadaver.

Still, you will have more in common biologically with a living person than with a person whose heart has stopped. Your vital organs will function, you’ll maintain your body temperature, and your wounds will continue to heal. You can still get bedsores, have heart attacks and get fever from infections.

“I like my dead people cold, stiff, gray and not breathing,” says Dr. Michael A. DeVita of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. “The brain dead are warm, pink and breathing.”

You might also be emitting brainwaves. Most people are surprised to learn that many people who are declared brain dead are never actually tested for higher-brain activity. The 1968 Harvard committee recommended that doctors use electroencephalography (EEG) to make sure the patient has flat brain waves. Today’s tests concentrate on the stalk-like brain stem, in charge of basics such as breathing, sleeping and waking. The EEG would alert doctors if the cortex, the thinking part of your brain, is still active.

But various researchers decided that this test was unnecessary, so it was eliminated from the mandatory criteria in 1971. They reasoned that, if the brain stem is dead, the higher centers of the brain are also probably dead.

But in at least two studies before the 1981 Uniform Determination of Death Act, some “brain-dead” patients were found to be emitting brain waves. One, from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke in the 1970s, found that out of 503 patients who met the usual criteria of brain death, 17 showed activity in an EEG.

Even some of the sharpest critics of the brain-death criteria argue that there is no possibility that donors will be in pain during the harvesting of their organs. One, Robert Truog, professor of medical ethics, anesthesia and pediatrics at Harvard Medical School, compared the topic of pain in an organ donor to an argument over “whether it is OK to kick a rock.”

But BHCs – who don’t receive anesthetics during an organ harvest operation – react to the scalpel like inadequately anesthetized live patients, exhibiting high blood pressure and sometimes soaring heart rates. Doctors say these are simply reflexes.

Source: Wall Street Journal
Audio: AlbertMohler.com – The Briefing. Listen to full audio here.