I encourage you to go read his blog, this article, the comment section, and then go over to Clinical Psychology and Psychiatry: A Closer and read his fine blog and the comment section there. I will let you judge on your own who is on your side in psychiatry today!
As I've written on this blog before, Dr. Joseph Biederman is an outstanding scientist but is also the prototypical MGH/Harvard narcissist. I speak from experience, having attended the MGH psychiatry residency from 1992-1995. We all joked about our arrogance and hubris and narcissism. It was almost a badge of honor. When you are at the top-ranked psychiatry department in the nation (as MGH has been every single year from 1995 to 2008, according to U.S. News and World Report) you are entitled to an extra heaping of, umm, positive self-regard, shall we say.
Call him the King of Cringe. Disagree with his opinions about the prevalence of pediatric bipolar disorder. Call him greedy, even. But scientifically, I continue to respect him and I believe that he ultimately has the best interests of his patients at heart.”
My comments there:
Dear Daniel Carlat, M.D.:
Shall we derive from your opinion on Biederman's research and studies; you personally believe in the Child Bipolar Paradigm and the use of anti psychotics in children as young as pre-school age?
You say that you believe his science is sound; wouldn't it be juxtaposition to then say his results are incorrect?
Thank you,
Stan
My second comment:
Joseph Biederman deposition.
Q. And do you agree that you are one of the most forceful advocates of the aggressive treatment of preschoolers?
A.(Biederman)It is her statement about me.
Q.I didn't ask you if it was her statement about you.I'm asking you if you agree that you are one of the most forceful advocates of the aggressive treatment of preschoolers.
A.(Biederman) I am.
You can read on where he admits there are no long term studies on Risperdal in children or adults; but that doesn't matter! Biederman says even without the science he will continue to prescribe this drug in his practice to preschoolers. How about the six breaches of protocol in his study that were never reported?
I guess that is called sound science in psychiatry today?
I just love when those of us out in the real world beyond those holier than thou walls at Harvard question the ethics and science behind those like Biederman.
We are called and labeled the anti-psychiatry crowd or even placed in Scientology's slot.
Yeah, you call those people outrageous!
Yet, so many of those mighty Dr.'s are circling the wagons in defence of the indefensible.
Who's got the real problem here?
Doctors as supposed reasonable professionals would call this a change for the good and making progress?
This is the status as normal in medicine as it stands today; when the doctor is wrong, don't ever blame the doctor; instead blame the patient and critics.
By not answering some pretty simple questions here Dr Carlat; you have in view of many answered them quite clearly by not taking a stand.
I believe this kind of narcissism has got the anti-psychiatry grass roots patient movement in full swing and making great strides toward marginalizing and debunking the very profession and industry many here so ardently defend even in the worst examples of conduct as in the your renowned Biederman.
Maybe you have forgotten that real people just as valued as your selves and family members are harmed by this kind of reckless medicine every day; many times beyond repair by the likes of this greed mongering and self appointed god complex in absolute thinking behaviour.
You just keep on making light of the egregious acts of these industry opinion leaders and institutions.
To those non-club members at Harvard and the medical inside crowd: it appears that we have a profession here that is playing apologist, by their own rules, and doesn't see the train coming speeding down the tracks; headed right at your coveted profession.
I'm thankful that Senator Grassley doesn't read this situation like so many on the inside of the bubble do!
Stan
Read Biederman's deposition in pfd format at Ed Silverman's IN VIVO blog.
It's all there for reading and the proper context within the questioning of Biederman.
Stephany
Disclaimer: I am not a Scientologist, and feel an argument dismissing people with questions regarding ethics and integrity of science, and outcome for drug approval a result--- makes a person appear arrogant and not willing to change or see things except from own perspective, why not be open-minded and keep the conversation flowing for all parties to gain from?)
I would offer this discussion these questions:
1) Why did Harvard/MGH not inform the NIH about Dr. Biederman’s collaboration with J&J when it applied for the NIH bipolar disorder grant?
2) Several documents that Dr. Biederman supplied to the court make note of a “JB rent fund.” What is the “JB rent fund” and to whom did the money go?
3) Why did MGH not inform OHRP about the IRB protocol violations in Dr. Biederman’s study?
4) For that particular study, please explain each IRB protocol violation and how those violations were resolved.
5) Did representatives of MGH discuss collaborating on the Center with marketing people from J&J, as Attachment H states?
6) Were the slides detailed in the attachments to this letter created by Dr. Biederman? If not, who created them?
7) Please explain if these slides were ever presented to an audience. If so, who saw these presentations?
The questions are from Senator Grassley, re: the breach of Protocol in Joseph Biederman's trial of anti psychotics on preschool age children. Asking this from an interested stance here, as a mother of a child harmed by psych meds. I didn't choose to want to think about the questions I ask. I question a lot now, as a result of my daughter being disabled from the drugs. Most regular readers of this blog know her story, so I don't need to say any more. Has anyone else read the deposition from Feb 27, 2009 that I left the link for above?
Thanks,
Stephany
Then finally the comment I left on Clinical Psychology and Psychiatry: A Closer Look in comment section in regards to TF’s comment about psychiatry, and Dr. Carlat’s apologist stand toward Biederman.
My Comment:
TF wrote:
"Psychiatrists are lame until proven otherwise, and I can say that as I am one, but I hope not lame."
Though I can understand on some level the frustration and emotion involved in the scope of TF's views. I also must admit I am pleasantly surprised/impressed with the way TF has changed in his opinions and outlook as far as psychiatry goes.
TF you are on the inside looking out. I believe a little less bravado and just a little bit more staying on message will get you a lot more ears listening and agreeing with you from the professional end anywise.
You are in a good position to be a voice of professional reasoning and change. I would only ask you walk a little softer, as well as carrying that big stick with some prudence.
I sure wish you would have been this candid and honest with your awakening when you were at FS posting.
I entered Carlat’s comment section after reading his apologetic stance on Biederman to find out if he was really for substantial change in psychiatry or just walking the fence in the usual patronizing fashion psychiatry tends to do.
His answers and avoidance of them was quite alarming; since without coming out openly and bluntly saying he is agreeing with Biederman's use of preschool age children and the use of dangerous anti-psychotics in that population.
He ardently agrees with Biederman's methods and science as being sound in spite of the fact that Biederman had protocol lapses that were not reported six times in his renowned preschool age study; as well as stating what the results would be before even doing the study surely at J&J’s beckoning.
That leaves open a whole lot of wiggle room and openings for the old Harvard hanky panky and big unreported bucks in his pocket game. I don’t believe children are games or lab rats to be tempered with for greed or status at any level; but especially in what is supposed to be a respected and ethical medical profession.
Carlat also implies he is bought into the Child Bipolar paradigm with the assumed use of anti-psychotics in preschool age children.
That pretty much sealed the deal as far as knowing what side of the fence he is really walking on. I guess once your an indoctrinated MGH Harvard Doctor; your always part of the clan/family so to speak.
Personally, I would more often than not stay away from Nazi death camp doctor references in general in relating to the current events in Pharma and Psychiatry. Carlat has brought this one up himself, and left the door wide open for rebuke.
Quoting Carlat from the comment section of his Blog:
"Hi fans and ex-fans,The point of the post was to say that there are some things Biederman is guilty of, and some things he isn't. Narcissism, egotism, greed? Yep.
Fraud, perpetrator of evil, creator of pediatric bipolar disorder, impetus for all psychiatrists who have ever prescribed too many antipsychotics? Of course not.
This is not Dr. Mengele. And anyone who wants to go to pubmed and read his clinical trials will actually find that they are, for the most part very well done and written up fairly without exaggerating positive findings or downplaying side effects.
Bipolar disorder does, in fact, occur in children, whether you call in bipolar or conduct disorder or juvenile delinquency. And it is clear that antipsychotics moderate the behavior, though at the cost of significant side effects.
Welcome to medicine, a world where there are no perfect solutions to many challenging problems.
It's time to stop blaming Biederman for all of psychiatry's failings and for all of the evils of the pharmaceutical industry. Let's put our energies into something more productive--like coming up with solutions for how to appropriately work with industry without doing their marketing for them."
Dr. Carlat is right! This is not Dr. Mengele since he is dead, a remembered dark chapter in history, and long past thankfully.
Biederman is in fact very much alive, still practicing medicine, collecting a fat pay check, still feeling like he's on top of the world and second in line to God almighty.Biederman has set a professional standard in the industry, is the dark voice of child psychiatry, its most adamant spokesperson, and is still personally feeding preschool age kids powerful anti-psychotic drugs to this day. Not just for child bipolar mind you: but also for ADHD and other behavioral disorders. A whopping 4000% increase over the past decade in children including preschool age.The difference is quite clear; we stopped the Nazi's and declared we would never let atrocities like that happen again. Yet today we are allowing the same type of crimes to happen for greed and omnipotent professor status. Only this time around in the name of science and medicine; yet the vastness of the victimization has not changed really all that much if you see and imagine the decades of damage to come.I have been reading this site, am impressed with the quality of content, and integrity of information posted here.I am sad to say there seems to be no end to this corruption and madness anytime soon.
Thank You,
Stan
As always your comments are welcome