LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER
Bush to screen population for mental illness
Sweeping initiative links diagnoses to treatment with specific drugs

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: June 21, 2004
5:00 p.m. Eastern



© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

President Bush plans to unveil next month a sweeping mental health
initiative that recommends screening for every citizen and promotes
the use of expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs favored
by supporters of the administration.

The New Freedom Initiative, according to a progress report, seeks to
integrate mentally ill patients fully into the community by providing
"services in the community, rather than institutions," the British
Medical Journal reported.

Critics say the plan protects the profits of drug companies at the
expense of the public.

The initiative began with Bush's launch in April 2002 of the New
Freedom Commission on Mental Health, which conducted a "comprehensive
study of the United States mental health service delivery system."

The panel found that "despite their prevalence, mental disorders often
go undiagnosed" and recommended comprehensive mental health screening
for "consumers of all ages," including preschool children.

The commission said, "Each year, young children are expelled from
preschools and childcare facilities for severely disruptive behaviors
and emotional disorders."

Schools, the panel concluded, are in a "key position" to screen the 52
million students and 6 million adults who work at the schools.

The commission recommended that the screening be linked with
"treatment and supports," including "state-of-the-art treatments"
using "specific medications for specific conditions."

The Texas Medication Algorithm Project, or TMAP, was held up by the
panel as a "model" medication treatment plan that "illustrates an
evidence-based practice that results in better consumer outcomes."

The TMAP -- started in 1995 as an alliance of individuals from the
pharmaceutical industry, the University of Texas and the mental health
and corrections systems of Texas -- also was praised by the American
Psychiatric Association, which called for increased funding to
implement the overall plan.

But the Texas project sparked controversy when a Pennsylvania
government employee revealed state officials with influence over the
plan had received money and perks from drug companies who stand to
gain from it.

Allen Jones, an employee of the Pennsylvania Office of the Inspector
General says in his whistleblower report the "political/pharmaceutical
alliance" that developed the Texas project, which promotes the use of
newer, more expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs, was
behind the recommendations of the New Freedom Commission, which were
"poised to consolidate the TMAP effort into a comprehensive national
policy to treat mental illness with expensive, patented medications of
questionable benefit and deadly side effects, and to force private
insurers to pick up more of the tab."

Jones points out, according to the British Medical Journal, companies
that helped start the Texas project are major contributors to Bush's
election funds. Also, some members of the New Freedom Commission have
served on advisory boards for these same companies, while others have
direct ties to TMAP.

Eli Lilly, manufacturer of olanzapine, one of the drugs recommended in
the plan, has multiple ties to the Bush administration, BMJ says. The
elder President Bush was a member of Lilly's board of directors and
President Bush appointed Lilly's chief executive officer, Sidney
Taurel, to the Homeland Security Council.

Of Lilly's $1.6 million in political contributions in 2000, 82 percent
went to Bush and the Republican Party.

Another critic, Robert Whitaker, journalist and author of "Mad in
America," told the British Medical Journal that while increased
screening "may seem defensible," it could also be seen as "fishing for
customers."

Exorbitant spending on new drugs "robs from other forms of care such
as job training and shelter program," he said.

However, a developer of the Texas project, Dr. Graham Emslie, defends
screening.

"There are good data showing that if you identify kids at an earlier
age who are aggressive, you can intervene ... and change their
trajectory."

David wrote:

LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER
Bush to screen population for mental illness
Sweeping initiative links diagnoses to treatment with specific drugs

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: June 21, 2004
5:00 p.m. Eastern

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

President Bush plans to unveil next month a sweeping mental health
initiative that recommends screening for every citizen and promotes
the use of expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs favored
by supporters of the administration.

The New Freedom Initiative, according to a progress report, seeks to
integrate mentally ill patients fully into the community by providing
"services in the community, rather than institutions," the British
Medical Journal reported.

Critics say the plan protects the profits of drug companies at the
expense of the public.

The initiative began with Bush's launch in April 2002 of the New
Freedom Commission on Mental Health, which conducted a "comprehensive
study of the United States mental health service delivery system."

The panel found that "despite their prevalence, mental disorders often
go undiagnosed" and recommended comprehensive mental health screening
for "consumers of all ages," including preschool children.

The commission said, "Each year, young children are expelled from
preschools and childcare facilities for severely disruptive behaviors
and emotional disorders."

Schools, the panel concluded, are in a "key position" to screen the 52
million students and 6 million adults who work at the schools.

The commission recommended that the screening be linked with
"treatment and supports," including "state-of-the-art treatments"
using "specific medications for specific conditions."

The Texas Medication Algorithm Project, or TMAP, was held up by the
panel as a "model" medication treatment plan that "illustrates an
evidence-based practice that results in better consumer outcomes."

The TMAP -- started in 1995 as an alliance of individuals from the
pharmaceutical industry, the University of Texas and the mental health
and corrections systems of Texas -- also was praised by the American
Psychiatric Association, which called for increased funding to
implement the overall plan.

But the Texas project sparked controversy when a Pennsylvania
government employee revealed state officials with influence over the
plan had received money and perks from drug companies who stand to
gain from it.

Allen Jones, an employee of the Pennsylvania Office of the Inspector
General says in his whistleblower report the "political/pharmaceutical
alliance" that developed the Texas project, which promotes the use of
newer, more expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs, was
behind the recommendations of the New Freedom Commission, which were
"poised to consolidate the TMAP effort into a comprehensive national
policy to treat mental illness with expensive, patented medications of
questionable benefit and deadly side effects, and to force private
insurers to pick up more of the tab."

Jones points out, according to the British Medical Journal, companies
that helped start the Texas project are major contributors to Bush's
election funds. Also, some members of the New Freedom Commission have
served on advisory boards for these same companies, while others have
direct ties to TMAP.

Eli Lilly, manufacturer of olanzapine, one of the drugs recommended in
the plan, has multiple ties to the Bush administration, BMJ says. The
elder President Bush was a member of Lilly's board of directors and
President Bush appointed Lilly's chief executive officer, Sidney
Taurel, to the Homeland Security Council.

Of Lilly's $1.6 million in political contributions in 2000, 82 percent
went to Bush and the Republican Party.

Another critic, Robert Whitaker, journalist and author of "Mad in
America," told the British Medical Journal that while increased
screening "may seem defensible," it could also be seen as "fishing for
customers."

Exorbitant spending on new drugs "robs from other forms of care such
as job training and shelter program," he said.

However, a developer of the Texas project, Dr. Graham Emslie, defends
screening.

"There are good data showing that if you identify kids at an earlier
age who are aggressive, you can intervene ... and change their
trajectory."

As someone who has been a volunteer board member for a private non profit mental health center for over 15 years this sounds like good news.

My primary concern is government programs tend to become bloated.

We test for hearing and vision problems in schools, we might as well test for mental illness.

Statistically, one out of ten teenagers will have a bout with mental illness. Throughout your life, odds are one in four that you'll have at least one mental health problem - even if it's just short term depression.

One of the biggest problems with mental health care is the stigma of mental illness makes people afraid to seek treatment.

This proposal has a chance to reduce or eliminate that stigma.

Seig Heil!

All you nut cases out there will be diagnosed and treated even if you dont
want to be....if you dont become a productive member of society then we will
rid the world of you!


Love always!

Adolph DUBYA Hitler

(Sorry BUll****.!!!..Its been done before in the 30's and it went over then
like a turd in the punch bowl!)

"Mark S. Holden" wrote in message
...
David wrote:

LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER
Bush to screen population for mental illness
Sweeping initiative links diagnoses to treatment with specific drugs


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Posted: June 21, 2004
5:00 p.m. Eastern

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

President Bush plans to unveil next month a sweeping mental health
initiative that recommends screening for every citizen and promotes
the use of expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs favored
by supporters of the administration.

The New Freedom Initiative, according to a progress report, seeks to
integrate mentally ill patients fully into the community by providing
"services in the community, rather than institutions," the British
Medical Journal reported.

Critics say the plan protects the profits of drug companies at the
expense of the public.

The initiative began with Bush's launch in April 2002 of the New
Freedom Commission on Mental Health, which conducted a "comprehensive
study of the United States mental health service delivery system."

The panel found that "despite their prevalence, mental disorders often
go undiagnosed" and recommended comprehensive mental health screening
for "consumers of all ages," including preschool children.

The commission said, "Each year, young children are expelled from
preschools and childcare facilities for severely disruptive behaviors
and emotional disorders."

Schools, the panel concluded, are in a "key position" to screen the 52
million students and 6 million adults who work at the schools.

The commission recommended that the screening be linked with
"treatment and supports," including "state-of-the-art treatments"
using "specific medications for specific conditions."

The Texas Medication Algorithm Project, or TMAP, was held up by the
panel as a "model" medication treatment plan that "illustrates an
evidence-based practice that results in better consumer outcomes."

The TMAP -- started in 1995 as an alliance of individuals from the
pharmaceutical industry, the University of Texas and the mental health
and corrections systems of Texas -- also was praised by the American
Psychiatric Association, which called for increased funding to
implement the overall plan.

But the Texas project sparked controversy when a Pennsylvania
government employee revealed state officials with influence over the
plan had received money and perks from drug companies who stand to
gain from it.

Allen Jones, an employee of the Pennsylvania Office of the Inspector
General says in his whistleblower report the "political/pharmaceutical
alliance" that developed the Texas project, which promotes the use of
newer, more expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs, was
behind the recommendations of the New Freedom Commission, which were
"poised to consolidate the TMAP effort into a comprehensive national
policy to treat mental illness with expensive, patented medications of
questionable benefit and deadly side effects, and to force private
insurers to pick up more of the tab."

Jones points out, according to the British Medical Journal, companies
that helped start the Texas project are major contributors to Bush's
election funds. Also, some members of the New Freedom Commission have
served on advisory boards for these same companies, while others have
direct ties to TMAP.

Eli Lilly, manufacturer of olanzapine, one of the drugs recommended in
the plan, has multiple ties to the Bush administration, BMJ says. The
elder President Bush was a member of Lilly's board of directors and
President Bush appointed Lilly's chief executive officer, Sidney
Taurel, to the Homeland Security Council.

Of Lilly's $1.6 million in political contributions in 2000, 82 percent
went to Bush and the Republican Party.

Another critic, Robert Whitaker, journalist and author of "Mad in
America," told the British Medical Journal that while increased
screening "may seem defensible," it could also be seen as "fishing for
customers."

Exorbitant spending on new drugs "robs from other forms of care such
as job training and shelter program," he said.

However, a developer of the Texas project, Dr. Graham Emslie, defends
screening.

"There are good data showing that if you identify kids at an earlier
age who are aggressive, you can intervene ... and change their
trajectory."

As someone who has been a volunteer board member for a private non profit
mental health center for over 15 years this sounds like good news.

My primary concern is government programs tend to become bloated.

We test for hearing and vision problems in schools, we might as well test
for mental illness.

Statistically, one out of ten teenagers will have a bout with mental
illness. Throughout your life, odds are one in four that you'll have at
least one mental health problem - even if it's just short term depression.

One of the biggest problems with mental health care is the stigma of
mental illness makes people afraid to seek treatment.

This proposal has a chance to reduce or eliminate that stigma.

From: David
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 16:37:38 GMT
Subject: Bush proposes mandatory mental health screening

LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER
Bush to screen population for mental illness
Sweeping initiative links diagnoses to treatment with specific drugs

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Posted: June 21, 2004
5:00 p.m. Eastern



© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

President Bush plans to unveil next month a sweeping mental health
initiative that recommends screening for every citizen and promotes
the use of expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs favored
by supporters of the administration.
(Snip)

You don't suppose they would test rec.radio.shortwave do ya?

Greg

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 01:51:53 GMT, Greg wrote:



From: David
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 16:37:38 GMT
Subject: Bush proposes mandatory mental health screening

LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER
Bush to screen population for mental illness
Sweeping initiative links diagnoses to treatment with specific drugs

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Posted: June 21, 2004
5:00 p.m. Eastern



© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

President Bush plans to unveil next month a sweeping mental health
initiative that recommends screening for every citizen and promotes
the use of expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs favored
by supporters of the administration.
(Snip)

You don't suppose they would test rec.radio.shortwave do ya?

Greg
Naah, they could forego the testing and go straight to treatment 8-}

= = = "Mark S. Holden" wrote in message
= = = ...

- - - - - S N I P - - - - -


However, a developer of the Texas project, Dr. Graham Emslie, defends
screening.

"There are good data showing that if you identify kids at an earlier
age who are aggressive, you can intervene ... and change their
trajectory."

As someone who has been a volunteer board member for a private
non profit mental health center for over 15 years this sounds
like good news.

My primary concern is government programs tend to become bloated.

We test for hearing and vision problems in schools,
we might as well test for mental illness.

Statistically, one out of ten teenagers will have a bout with
mental illness. Throughout your life, odds are one in four that
you'll have at least one mental health problem - even if it's
just short term depression.

One of the biggest problems with mental health care is the
stigma of mental illness makes people afraid to seek treatment.

This proposal has a chance to reduce or eliminate that stigma.


MSH,

Yours may be the Voice of Reason and Compassion for those in need.

But this post was done for the Condemnation and Denigrate any
effort to really 'help' and/or "Cure" those in need of Mental
Health Programs and Treatment.

The Left needs the Mentally Ill and the Homeless as 'problems'
to tout as "Issues" to Politic-About in their quest for power.

~ RHF

..

"Mark S. Holden" wrote in message
...


As someone who has been a volunteer board member for a private non profit
mental health center for over 15 years this sounds like good news.

My primary concern is government programs tend to become bloated.

There will have to be a whole new mental health bureaucracy. Actually two,
as there would have to be both a private and federal ureaucracy. Are there
really enough trained professionals to seriously evaluate the mental health
of every American? And can they do it competently? If so, what penalty
should we give to people who refuse treatment? Criminal or civil penalties?

And how can we know if the diagnosis is correct and was made properly? How
will we guarantee the rights of Americans?



We test for hearing and vision problems in schools, we might as well test
for mental illness.

Vision and hearing tests are pretty objective. But three different experts
might say a given kid is hyperactive, has ADD or is just acting like a
normal boy. Alot of parents don't want their kids on such drugs as Ritalin.
I think they may very well have a point. Strangely, European kids seem to
have a much lower need for Ritalin supplements.

How do we deal with such parents who think they are acting in their own
child's interest? What penalty should be enforced?



Statistically, one out of ten teenagers will have a bout with mental
illness. Throughout your life, odds are one in four that you'll have at
least one mental health problem - even if it's just short term depression.

And most of us will be OK. Or maybe not, depending where the standards are
set. It gets a bit subjective.



One of the biggest problems with mental health care is the stigma of
mental illness makes people afraid to seek treatment.


Or, every time somebody acts a bit unusual, they haul him in for a
"Government Mental Health Evaluation". Hey, just like the Soviet Union!
Only here in the US, we can force the miscreant to pay for his evaluation
and treatment. And, if the courts are in a good mood, they won't have the
same Constitution hang-up they have with criminal procedures.

This proposal has a chance to reduce or eliminate that stigma.

The proposal is to screen every citizen. What about those who refuse
because they feel they should be left the hell alone as long as they aren't
bothering anyone or there's no compelling emergency? That's me. I'll
refuse when I get my Mental Health letter from Uncle Sam.

Frank Dresser

RHF wrote:
= = = "Mark S. Holden" wrote in message
= = = ...

- - - - - S N I P - - - - -


However, a developer of the Texas project, Dr. Graham Emslie, defends
screening.

"There are good data showing that if you identify kids at an earlier
age who are aggressive, you can intervene ... and change their
trajectory."

As someone who has been a volunteer board member for a private
non profit mental health center for over 15 years this sounds
like good news.

My primary concern is government programs tend to become bloated.

We test for hearing and vision problems in schools,
we might as well test for mental illness.

Statistically, one out of ten teenagers will have a bout with
mental illness. Throughout your life, odds are one in four that
you'll have at least one mental health problem - even if it's
just short term depression.

One of the biggest problems with mental health care is the
stigma of mental illness makes people afraid to seek treatment.

This proposal has a chance to reduce or eliminate that stigma.



MSH,

Yours may be the Voice of Reason and Compassion for those in need.

But this post was done for the Condemnation and Denigrate any
effort to really 'help' and/or "Cure" those in need of Mental
Health Programs and Treatment.

The Left needs the Mentally Ill and the Homeless as 'problems'
to tout as "Issues" to Politic-About in their quest for power.

~ RHF

.

The cheap shot reply would be to claim they're afraid of losing their
base.

But actually, I think the reason the people on the left are opposed to
the idea is because it comes from GWB. If their guy proposed the idea
they'd be all for it.

It doesn't even sound like a "Conservative" idea until you realize the
economic cost of untreated mental ilness. It's about 100 billion
dollars per year in the USA.

Early diagnosis and treatment is cost effective. Everybody wins.

"Greg" wrote in message
...


You don't suppose they would test rec.radio.shortwave do ya?

Greg


What, and come across somebody like this guy?

http://www.improb.com/airchives/clas..._memorial.html

By the way, those two largish boxes with a central aluminum disk on Mr.
Brannd's upper shelf are signal generators. A Precision E-400 sweep
generator, and a Precision E-200 signal generator. Those sharp right angle
corners identify them as early units, probably made before 1950. They're
just like mine. I had to redo the wrinkle paint on mine. Did it on a hot
sunny day. Came out very nice.

I got rid of my round screen TV about six years ago, though. Gotta keep up
with the times.

Frank Dresser

David wrote:
LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER
Bush to screen population for mental illness
Sweeping initiative links diagnoses to treatment with specific drugs


This is a very bad joke. Right?




Jones points out, according to the British Medical Journal, companies
that helped start the Texas project are major contributors to Bush's
election funds. Also, some members of the New Freedom Commission have
served on advisory boards for these same companies, while others have
direct ties to TMAP.

Eli Lilly, manufacturer of olanzapine, one of the drugs recommended in
the plan, has multiple ties to the Bush administration, BMJ says. The
elder President Bush was a member of Lilly's board of directors and
President Bush appointed Lilly's chief executive officer, Sidney
Taurel, to the Homeland Security Council.

Of Lilly's $1.6 million in political contributions in 2000, 82 percent
went to Bush and the Republican Party.

Things really are worse than I thought. Mandatory feeding of
psychotropic drugs to people that the administration finds deficient.

In a few years 'deficient' will mean someone who didn't vote for you.


mike