Saturday, October 31, 2009

Sending my heart felt olive branch message to NAMI, DBSA, CABF, Pharma, herb, McManamy

Sending this olive branch message to NAMI, DBSA, CABF, Pharma, herb, McManamy, and all like minded individuals, corporations, web sites, and organizations that support a drugging paradigm which damages and endangers children, adults, and elderly populations in America and throughout the world.


Thursday, October 22, 2009

NAMI says they will take less money from Pharma

NAMI: Those Naughty Pharma Whores

They actually want you to believe they are going to get their act together.


This is the same NAMI that has fought tooth and nail against any financial disclosures; until Senator Grassley ordered them too. This also is coming from a supposed "non-profit" organization that is advertising itself as an advocate resource for the mentally ill (BULLSHIT).

They received @ least 75% of their drug booty funding from huge Pharmaceutical Companies that are in the business of drugging you and your kids for greedy self serving profit first and foremost; and definitely not for your good health or wellness.

NAMI has joined dirty hands in promoting this agenda with a criminal industry ( Yes, most of these companies have been convicted of fraud, illegal activities, and a whole host of other unsavory behaviors) in just about every state and federal legislative body through blatant influence peddling and lobbying efforts.

Now they want you to believe they are considering changing their ways?????

How much less money do you expect the public to except at this point; since you have shown to be cowards, liars, and misrepresented yourselves time and time again?

How about this as a solution: A stated and verifiable policy of NAMI accepting no money (THAT MEANS ZERO DOLLARS) from the Pharmaceutical industry in direct or indirect contributions; or any other funds related to those working within the NAMI organization related to endorsements, speaking engagements, drug promotion, or any Pharma related activities just for starters?

The facts are that NAMI is getting less in donations from the general public because they can not be trusted or relied upon to be ethical or honest. Their reputation among the informed is in the literal toilet now.

It will definitely take more than some shallow words from their Pharma Whore leaders and drug company spokespersons to repair that perception.

TRUST? TRUST IS AN EARNED COMMODITY (If you haven't learned that reality by now) NAMI

NAMI have not shown an ability to be trusted with anything except their own, and of course the Pharma Industries greed mongering.


From Pharmalot via the NYTimes - NAMI Promises To Take Less Pharma Money

Drug Makers Are Advocacy Group’s Biggest Donors


Published: October 21, 2009

WASHINGTON — A majority of the donations made to the National Alliance on Mental Illness, one of the nation’s most influential disease advocacy groups, have come from drug makers in recent years, according to Congressional investigators.

The alliance, known as NAMI, has long been criticized for coordinating some of its lobbying efforts with drug makers and for pushing legislation that also benefits industry.

Last spring, Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, sent letters to the alliance and about a dozen other influential disease and patient advocacy organizations asking about their ties to drug and device makers. The request was part of his investigation into the drug industry’s influence on the practice of medicine.

The mental health alliance, which is hugely influential in many state capitols, has refused for years to disclose specifics of its fund-raising, saying the details were private.

But according to investigators in Mr. Grassley’s office and documents obtained by The New York Times, drug makers from 2006 to 2008 contributed nearly $23 million to the alliance, about three-quarters of its donations.

Even the group’s executive director, Michael Fitzpatrick, said in an interview that the drug companies’ donations were excessive and that things would change.

“For at least the years of ’07, ’08 and ’09, the percentage of money from pharma has been higher than we have wanted it to be,” Mr. Fitzpatrick said.

He promised that the industry’s share of the organization’s fund-raising would drop “significantly” next year.

“I understand that NAMI gets painted as being in the pockets of pharmaceutical companies, and somehow that all we care about is pharmaceuticals,” Mr. Fitzpatrick said. “It’s simply not true.”

Mr. Fitzpatrick said Mr. Grassley’s scrutiny, which he described as understandable given the attention paid to potential conflicts of interest in medicine, had led his organization to begin posting on its Web site the names of companies that donate $5,000 or more. And he predicted that other patient and disease advocacy groups would be prodded by Mr. Grassley’s investigation to do the same.

“Everyone I talk to wants to have more balanced fund-raising,” Mr. Fitzpatrick said.

In a statement, Mr. Grassley praised the alliance for its disclosures. “It’d be good for the system for other patient groups to do what NAMI has done,” he said.

Mr. Grassley’s scrutiny has been unnerving for patient and disease advocacy groups, which are often filled with sincere people who are either afflicted with serious illnesses themselves or have family members who have been affected. Many join the groups in the hope of making sense of their misfortune by helping to find a cure or raising awareness of a disease’s risks and frequency.

Drug makers are natural allies in these pursuits since cures may come out of corporate laboratories and the industry’s money can help finance public service campaigns and fund-raising dinners. But industry critics have long derided some patient organizations as little more than front groups devoted to lobbying on issues that affect industry profits, and few have come under more scrutiny for industry ties than the mental health alliance.

For years, the alliance has fought states’ legislative efforts to limit doctors’ freedom to prescribe drugs, no matter how expensive, to treat mental illness in patients who rely on government health care programs like Medicaid. Some of these medicines routinely top the list of the most expensive drugs that states buy for their poorest patients.

Mr. Fitzpatrick defended these lobbying efforts, saying they were just one of many the organization routinely undertook.

The close ties between the alliance and drug makers were on stark display last week, when the organization held its annual gala at the Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium on Constitution Avenue in Washington. Tickets were $300 each. Before a dinner of roasted red bell pepper soup, beef tenderloin and tilapia, Dr. Stephen H. Feinstein, president of the alliance’s board, thanked Bristol-Myers Squibb, the pharmaceutical company.

“For the past five years, Bristol-Myers has sponsored this dinner at the highest level,” Dr. Feinstein said.

He then introduced Dr. Fred Grossman, chief of neuroscience research at Bristol-Myers, who told the audience that “now, more than ever, our enduring relationship with NAMI must remain strong.”

Documents obtained by The New York Times show that drug makers have over the years given the mental health alliance — along with millions of dollars in donations — direct advice about how to advocate forcefully for issues that affect industry profits. The documents show, for example, that the alliance’s leaders, including Mr. Fitzpatrick, met with AstraZeneca sales executives on Dec. 16, 2003.

Slides from a presentation delivered by the salesmen show that the company urged the alliance to resist state efforts to limit access to mental health drugs.

“Solutions: Play Hard Ball,” one slide was titled. “Hold policy makers accountable for their decisions in media and in election,” it continued.

The alliance’s own slides concluded by saying, “We appreciate AstraZeneca’s strong support of NAMI.”

Mr. Fitzpatrick said that the alliance frequently had such meetings and that the organization would fight for better access to mental health drugs “even if we had no relationship with pharmaceutical companies.”

Tony Jewell, an AstraZeneca spokesman, said that the company was “committed to improving health through partnerships with nonprofit organizations” and that “includes striving to ensure people can access our medicines through formularies managed by state Medicaid agencies.”


Alliance for Human Research Protection has a great article on this topic also: - NAMI Constituency Betrayed -

Furious Seasons NAMI Lies In NYT Letter To The Editor

Yet, the NAMI/Pharma money grab doesn't stop there: from DowJones Newswires Oct. 23, 2009 - news-story.aspx?storyid=200910221848dowjonesdjonline001058&title=grassley-probe-of-health-group-may-show-deeper-pharma-ties;col1


Let me add that those drug pimps @ NAMI are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg when it comes to "FRONT GROUPS" working for Big PhARMA.

DBSA and other like entities are just as guilty of having their dirty little hands in the greed mongering PhARMA cookie jar.

If you are approached by, or are conned into any group touting itself as a "Advocacy Organization" for mental health; Please ask first and foremost to see their financial disclosure statement before listening to a word they have to say.

These supposed "Non-Profits" and "Advocacy Organizations" are not working in your best interest. They work for those that line their pockets with Money.

NAMI, DBSA, and many others like them; are there just shames, fronts, and thieves taking truck loads of PhARMA cash: while doing a corrupt Industries bidding at the cost of your health and well being.

Read more on DBSA at:

Monday, October 12, 2009

Health Insurance Industry makes another Case for Single Payer Option - denies 4 month old still breast feeding coverage

17-Pound, 4-Month-Old Baby Denied Health Insurance for Being Too Fat

If you thought in your wildest dreams the "Health Insurance Industry" couldn't get any stupider. They have again one upped themselves by denying coverage to four month old for being to FAT.

I guess what the Health Insurance Industry is telling all Americans in no small way; lets all sing along with the Obama song now " We the Health Insurance Industry are in the business of making MONEY; so to that end, we only will cover HEALTHY PEOPLE that promise never to get sick"


From Fox News:,2933,564501,00.html

Nothing brings a smile to an adult's face quicker than the sight of a happy, chubby baby.

But the sight of 4-month-old Alex Lange, who measures 25-inches long and weighs 17 pounds, is bringing a frown to the hypothetical face of insurance company Rocky Mountain Health Plan The Denver Post reported on its Web site Monday.

Underwriters, the people who are in charge of assessing risk for insurance companies, have decided that baby Alex's pre-existing condition —Obesity — makes him a high-risk patient and have denied him coverage.

His parents were shocked.

"I could understand if we could control what he's eating. But he's 4 months old. He's breast-feeding. We can't put him on the Akins Diet or on a treadmill," joked his frustrated father, Bernie Lange, a part-time news anchor at KKCO-TV in Grand Junction. "There is just something absurd about denying an infant."

Bernie and Kelli Lange tried to get insurance with Rocky Mountain Health Plans when their current insurer raised their rates 40 percent after Alex was born.

After filling out the necessary paperwork, the broker who was helping the family find new insurance called last Thursday with the shocking news that Alex, who weighed 8 1/4-pounds at birth, was being denied coverage.

At 17 pounds, Alex is in the 99th percentile for height and weight for babies his age. His parents were told insurance companies don't take babies above the 95th percentile, no matter how healthy.

Dr. Doug Speedie, medical director at insurance company Rocky Mountain Health Plans, told KKCO-TV, it’s possible for a baby to be above the 95 percentile and still be healthy, and admitted the system is flawed.

“Your weight is not an absolute determinate of health," Speedie said. “Unfortunately when we try to sell people insurance, a number has to be used as a cutoff."


No wonder the Insurance Industry is fighting so hard against real and substantial Health Care Reform; they have the winning Lotto Ticket for every draw, while having no intention of sharing the winnings with America.

Is the newest Nobel Peace Prize recipient listening out there?


Update: It appears the Health Insurance Industry has decided to sing a different tune after all the bad press.

Just an opinion here: This move is a day late and a trillion dollars short. If we were not in a huge Health Care Reform Debate that may effect the The Insurance Industry Bottom Line negatively; I must wonder with great suspicion if they would have taken this quick and decisive action?,2933,564947,00.html?test=health

DENVER — A Colorado insurance company is changing its attitude about fat babies.

Rocky Mountain Health Plans said it will no longer consider obesity a "pre-existing condition" barring coverage for hefty infants. The change comes after the insurer turned down a Grand Junction 4-month-old who weighs about 17 pounds. The insurer deemed Alex Lange obese and said the infant didn't qualify for coverage.

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Oprah ignores child abuse while omitting key facts with a disturbing show featuring Jani Schofield 7 year old Schizophrenic

Oprah ignores child abuse while omitting key facts with a disturbing show featuring Jani Schofield 7 year old Schizophrenic.

Today Oprah ( did a Typically Sad Powder Puff Show on Childhood Schizophrenia featuring Jani Schofield a supposed 7 year old Schizophrenic; who's Father Michael admitted to being a blatant abuser on his blog:

From his blog are the following quotes:

"I have had to recall a memory of once trying to throw Susan out of our moving car because I was so angry."

"Jani saw some of my violent rages. She has seen me hit her mother and her mother hit me back.

"I could feel the anger building inside of me, but be unable to stop it. Even during my most violent rages, a small voice inside my head would be telling me "You are going to regret this, Michael." I could see the fear in Jani's eyes. I could see in the pain and anguish in Susan's eyes. But I could not stop. It was a bizarre experience. I was rational, yet not in control of my emotions. There was so much rage in me that I wanted to hurt. Because I was hurt. And I wanted the world to feel my pain. I suspect that some variation of this is what Jani experiences."

"I suspect that this is also what serial killers experience. The only difference between them and me is I eventually listen to that voice telling me what I was doing was wrong."

"Five year olds are still desperate for parental approval.

Yes, kids have temper tantrums. But Jani would dig her nails into my skin and pull...leaving a bloody track down my arm or face. She would grin while she did this, a demonic grin that would have scared me had I had time to really think about it. But I didn't.

We tried everything. Positive reinforcement. Negative reinforcement. Hitting her back (I won't tell you how many people told us that all she needed was a good beating). We took all her toys away. We gave her toys away. We tried starving her. We did EVERYTHING we could to try and break her. Nothing worked.

Even then, it did not occur to us that our daughter was mentally ill. Now I wonder who was really delusional. Susan and I held fast to our belief that Jani was just a misunderstood genius.

Then Bodhi was born.

The violence became so bad that at times Susan and I both lost it and hit Jani as hard as we could. We hit in impotent rage.

We got a referral to a psychiatrist.

Two months later, Janni was hospitalized for the first of what has since been four times, but in truth will be many more times."

"Today, Jani is no longer a brat. Today, Jani is schizophrenic."


Oprah's research team obviously knew about the reported and admitted abuse; while choosing to ignore these facts for this show.

Of course I'm not surprised in the least by this kind of Tabloid Propaganda. Oprah has Pharmaceutical Company Ads running at the top of her site, uses a "NAMI" sponsored Doctor for her question-n-answer dog and pony show ( It's Not Breaking News that "NAMI" is just the paid Propaganda Pimp for Big Pharma), and did some great promoting of the parents new status as spokesperson profiteers for the New and Improved "Child-Hood Mental Illness Drugging Paradigm".

So what we got was another LA Times Bedtime Story sort of show, which didn't want the whole truth told, the real facts being shared, or all the information out there so "Joe" or "Jane" Public could make a balanced informed opinion on this topic.

Well, this must be a daddy "sociopath's" dream come true, as the accolades and attention abound. You have to wonder when the huge book deal will be stamped, and the movie will go into production. You must have also been thinking to yourself as you watched this piece of propaganda garbage on "Oprah"; where can you go to sign up as a fan club member and give away my hard earned cash?

I gather this is what our society has come down too after all is said and done in these times of no direction, lack of moral compass, or any basic social standards! We reward the worst kinds of people, behaviors, and crimes because it sells TV Shows, News, Products, and Influence.

The News/Tabloid Business must be beaming with pride as they lay their heads with absolutely no conscience against that soft pillow tonight.

Related links:

Oct 18, 2009 Open Letter to Oprah @ Different Thoughts Blog

Investigative reporter, Philip Dawdy live blogs the Oprah TV program here at his mental health news blog, Furious Seasons.

Different Thoughts blog had also written about Jani

soulful sepulcher blog also writes about Jani.

LA Times reporter defends child abuse in email exchange

Stan, discovered the father's blog

FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted (C) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.

Terms and conditions on the use of the contents of the “Is Something Not Quite Right with Stan - A Mental Health Blog” site are for informational and entertainment purposes only. Stan does not represent or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or reliability of the information or content (collectively, the "Materials") contained on, distributed through, or linked, downloaded or accessed from this website.

Stan encourages you to make your own health care and legal decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care and/ or legal professional. The information posted here should not be considered medical advice and is not intended to replace consultation with a qualified medical professional if they exist. I do not answer specific medical questions.

Third party information is gathered from sources that Stan believes to be reliable. However, in no event shall Stan, or any third parties mentioned on this site be liable for any damages resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the content whether or not Stan is advised of the possibility of such damages.

Stan reserves the right, in its sole discretion and without any obligation, to make improvements to, or correct any error or omissions in any portion of the displayed materials.

You hereby acknowledge that any reliance upon any Materials shall be at your sole risk.

Disclaimer of Liability

The user assumes all responsibility and risk for the use of this web site and the Internet generally. Under no circumstances, including negligence, shall anyone involved in creating or maintaining this web site, or shall the website writer or any commenter’s be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special or consequential damages, or lost profits that result from the use or inability to use the web site and/or any other web sites which are linked to this site.

Nor shall they be liable for any such damages including, but not limited to, reliance by a visitor on any information obtained via the web site; or that result from mistakes, omissions, interruptions, deletion of files, viruses, errors, defects, or any failure of performance, communications failure, theft, destruction or unauthorized access.


In states which do not allow some or all of the above limitations of liability, liability shall be limited to the greatest extent allowed by law.

Disclaimer of Endorsement - Reference to any products, services, hypertext link to the third parties or other information by trade name, trademark, supplier or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation by me. Nor is an endorsement by me is implied by such links. They are for convenience only, as an index in a public library.

Information Subject to Change - Any information on this web site may be removed without notice. Information may include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Furthermore, the information may change from time to time without any notice.

GENERAL INFORMATION - The information contained in this online site is presented and intended to provide a broad understanding and knowledge critical to psychiatric practices and humorous social interaction. The information should not be considered complete and should not be used in place of communication and consultation.


This site is not a monologue of truth. It is a catalyst for public debate about medical conduct and for entertainment purposes. The reader is urged to confront officials to clarify issues mentioned herein. This site is designed strictly to provide information for critical, literary, academic, entertainment, and public usage. A qualified and trustworthy medical professional must be consulted regarding medical issues, treatments, diagnoses, etc.; if they exist in all actuality or truth.