It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Smoking Gun That THEY WANT YOU TO KEEP! The REAL Story.

page: 15
175
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by LiveForever8
 


I can't even venture a guess, but I'm sure that it's a very larger number than we can really only guess at or extrapolate and that cannot really be be substantiated due to the probably billions of dollars big pharma and the medical industry pay to sweep it under the rug.

ETA: Top Ten Legal Drugs Linked to Violence
edit on 12/27/2012 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 01:21 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 03:38 AM
link   
www.ssristories.com... an amazing list of irrefutable evidence from www.hourofthetime.com

When a drunk driver kills someone or worse a family of people, is it the fault of the Chevrolet, Ford, Volkswagen etc that he/she is driving???? Or is it the fault of the company that he / she last bought gas/petrol (ammunition) from????

Would passing more laws related to 'driving under the influence' make any real difference to a drunk driver being able to drive a car drunk????

The only way to minimise evil in the world is to seek the truth and act on it, your government / lobbies etc will not do this for you.

Love from Scotland.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 03:42 AM
link   
Ok I understand that my following comment will come off as racist, bigotted, prejudice or whatever, but I dont mean it that way. In fact I am only about to state what I believe are facts based from my personaly observations and interactions with the thousands of people I have known in my life. But it seems to me the VAST MAJORITY of the demographic taking these various medications happen to be white folk. Yes yes I am being a racist pig now, I understand, please forgive me.

But when I was in school, whenever I heard of someone of my fellow peers on these strangley named synthetic chemicals marketed as "medicine" they were overwhelmingly white students. And thats that we were mostly from all the same income groups. When you go to an inner city public school the wealthy or upper middle class dont exactly put their childrens names on a waiting list to attend.

I can remember at least 1 dozen and half students that I knew who were on these strange drugs, and they were mostly white. And my school was primarily black and hispanic. I do remember a student in my third period freshman class that was black that was on zolaft or whatever you call it. He was the only one and I dont remember any of my hispanic classmates ever once mentioning being on any kind of medications. Now I understand that does not mean there were not any in the school who were taking the meds, this is based soley on people I knew.

Now fast forward ten years later, I am noticing the same pattern at my workplace. And I work at wal-mart for crying out loud. My store is overwhelmingly black and hispanic emplyed with only 20-30 co-worker who would be known to many as considered "white" folk, out of a workforce of 400+. I know almost everyone in that store. And of the ones that I know of who are taking mediction in that anti-depressant class, 7 of them are white, 2 hispanic and not one black person. Now of course It may be that every other minority (ha what a word to use) that I do not know of taking meds is in fact taking them but does not have any interest in sharing the info. And I know there is a significantly larger proportion of individuals who are on this stuff that have no interest in sharing that information.

But my point is, why am I seeing that mostly white people, even in the same income groups, overwhelmingly outnumber other races and ethnicities taking these meds? Am I being an ass or does anyone else see this pattern as well? Or maybe I am only seeing what I want to see.

Just want to note I have a very diverse mix of friends and acquaintances, and this controversial point of view is my own, based on my own personal observations and interactions in my lifetime with the human race. Surely others will have had different observations that do not support mine, and may question why I even believe race is of any consequence. I dont think so, i am simply stating my observations.

Once again, forgive my directness and my lack of political correctness as well.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 03:50 AM
link   
reply to post by DYepes
 


Google is our friend.


From 1992-1993 to 2003-2004, the annualized rate of visits documenting a diagnosis of depression increased from 10.9 to 15.4 per 100 US population for whites, from 4.2 to 7.6 for blacks, and from 4.8 to 7.0 for Hispanics.

A concomitant diagnosis of depression and antidepressant use increased from 6.5 to 11.4 per 100 for whites, from 2.6 to 5.2 for blacks, and from 3.0 to 5.6 for Hispanics. It can be concluded that by 2003-2004, diagnostic and treatment rates were comparable among blacks and Hispanic, but were less than half the observed rates for whites.


Source

That said, what's your point?

I'm guessing more white people are on drugs because it's more part of their culture and lifestyle to go see a shrink when they are feeling sad.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 04:06 AM
link   
Oh I get it now, I pretty much never see a pharmaceutical commercial on BEt or telemundo!

Oh man thats just tasteless I know, but I had to say it. I suppose i am going to hear that because blacks and hispanics dont go pour their heart out to a doctor and/or shrink and get doped up as much, it may be a cause for why crimes perpetrated by these demographics are higher.

Im going to drop the subject though now that I see my observations were not illusions but documented facts. Well, good luck adjusting to a world without pharmaceuticals if there is an impending global disaster coming soon. I never even filled the prescription for painkillers my the Hospital gave me when I almost died in a car accident last year and had a broken leg and fractures in my face. i mean if it only hurts when I mvoe about, and i am going to be bed ridden most of the time for recovery, then why should I even take the meds? And why would the doctor be offended that I did not fill the prescription when I clearly stated I never wanted it.

Who wants to bet that soon with this mandatory health insurance bull there will be a way found to convince more people legally that they must take certain meds for certain symptoms in order for the insurance to even cover the bill?? Hmm any takes on that? I will wager two pistols and a shotgun the medical industry will bring it to that point within my sons' generation.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by DYepes
 


I think some of it is because more white family’s had better health insurance. I could be wrong.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 

reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


Dear Lucidity and Heff,

Appreciate the above Lucidity, it is a nicely condensed piece of information. Re Heff's posting above also, it would seem clearly obvious you are somewhat personally attached to this topic.

I'm going to put all of this on it's head, again, just for the sake of lucidity =)

All of these killers were troubled and required medication, that is obvious from the information provided, what is to say it is the drugs themselves which made them fall over the precipice and not the mental disorders they were suffering to start with. I previously made a statement which has been largely ignored and that if you want to truly look at this you need to compare the number of people using these drugs worldwide versus violent outbreaks. You cannot simply make a tangent that because all the nutjobs who recently went out and committed heinous acts of violence were on SSRIs, that the SSRIs are the root cause. The root cause is they were nutjobs.

I think you're trying to find some reasoning to all this violence and I admire this fact, I fully realize that SSRIs, Prozac namely has been reported to have some personality affecting properties, and I also go back to what I posted earlier on page 6 I think it was: Millions of people took and still take MDMA which acts in a rather similar fashion by flushing serotonin into the brain (rather than stopping serotonin from being reabsorbed) so what about all of those? Mind altering, yes, violent? No.

What you're doing is taking a small subset of mentally disturbed people and pointing at the drugs they took to try and control their mental illness as the problem. Shouldn't you be focusing on the fact that they were prescribed the drugs for a very crystal clear reason? I mean.. it's not that much of a push is it? Really?

One common thing I find in humanity is it's desire to try and explain away everything by pointing the finger. It's obvious to me at least what the problems are, in the US much like everywhere else. Big pharma is definitely not a friend to humanity in certain respects, but poor parenting, poverty, lack of morals, gun related rap and the glorification of killing in your hood or slapping your bitch, violence in TV/Games, over glorification of violence in sports, low IQ bred kids like on a conveyor belt and general perceived lack of a good honest future leads to these problems. Those are what you should be fighting against.

Our society is the cancer.

T
edit on 27-12-2012 by torqpoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 04:19 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 04:29 AM
link   
reply to post by torqpoc
 


Ahh but here is the kicker, the drugs did not point a gun at the nutjobs head and force them to act violently right? No, they only completely altered the brain chemistry inside their head, something that has historically been a dangerous thing to do to a nutjob. See unlike tools, guns, weapons and other inanimate objects which have zero physical or psycological effect on an individual, the drugs actually change the way a person is. They change who the person is, alter their thinking. Doing so in people who are already losing their mind, well clearly we have been seeing the results of that for many years now havnt we?



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by thesmokingman
I have been taking a few of those over the past few years. I can say that taking/getting off of these are a NIGHTMARE to say the least. You are actually changing the chemical levels of the brain when you take these. That being said, I have been through MANY events getting on/off of these meds. But I can say for certain( and I am a gun owner/lover), I have NEVER thought about doing these sorts of things. I have been through a divorce, and job loss, but still never once contimplated such actions. It all comes down to a personal choice in the end. We all have had crazy thoughts, but it is those who act upon such thoughts, that are to blame, no one/thing else imo.

Or maybe people have different reactions?? I know of people who basically lost all empathy and was borderline psychopathic while on these meds. Just because you did not have any such issues does not mean it is same for everyone.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 06:33 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
I'm not sure anyone's mentioned yet that coming OFF of some of the medications abruptly or improperly can be even more harmful than being on them. One example is Xanax, which I've read stopping cold turkey can cause a psychotic break.

And again, how does it happen that so many are so over-medicated? .Ask the doctors. You know. The ones in bed with big pharma and the lawmakers.


At last a valid point in this ''it was them'' finger pointing thread.

Medicating a person of mental health issues is complex, there could be a number of factors that require chemical modification, such as personality disorders, psychosis, depression etc, most of these diagnoses are multi faceted and require complex prescriptions with specific dosages.

A person that is suffering from any such disorders might not take them as prescribed, they could have taken them all, too many, not enough or stopped them completely. They could have taken more of one and less of another, they could have gotten off on a jolly from taking all their *whichever* in double dosages, for a week, leaving them with none for the next week, these could be prescribed to counteract the side effects of another medication. They could have mixed alcohol / narcotics / over the counter medicines etc etc that could have had an effect. They could have not eaten / drank too much coffee / coca cola / sugar that affected their metabolism and hence the uptake of their medication. There are so many factors that could affect their medication.

Proper studies with more in depth analysis is required and possible modification of these medicines or increased supervision of those requiring them.

The difficulty in diagnosing such conditions and hence prescribing for them is that the patient is presented with limited information, from themselves, their actions and the words of others. Often their behaviour is inconsistent, and due to the irrational nature of such conditions, often, not so easy to diagnose without long term monitoring under controlled circumstances. Here in the UK and perhaps in most other countries, there aren't the resources for such longer term controlled monitoring for the purpose of diagnosis and supervision.

There are also guidelines for prescribing, for example if a patient tried OD'ing and took all their months supply of medication at once and survived, they are then left with none but with too much in their system to prescribe more, and their hands tied as to prescribing anything.

Trusting a person suffering from any number of conditions to self medicate appropriately is a bit like leaving an alcoholic or food addict in a bar / cake shop and expecting them to just sit there and refrain.

GP's, Psychiatrists etc are given limited parameters for prescribing, governmental bodies legislate these and all prescribed drugs have to be licensed and therefore thoroughly tested and ALLOWED.

There weren't as many of these mass killing incidents in the past in many places because for example, in the UK people were put in the ''mad house'' for little more than being unmarried and pregnant or unruly or ''simple''.

Whilst this prevented a lot of potential events, it also misdiagnosed often and infringed on human rights.

Perhaps some sort of middle ground should be sought, more emphasis on diagnosis and supervision in well trained, properly resourced institutions.

In the late 80's and 90's in the UK a lot of institutions that housed those suffering from mental health conditions in a controlled health care environment were routinely closed, leaving those vulnerable under such conditions to find their way in society under various Mental Health and Care in the Community Acts that basically gives a certain amount of responsibility to the local Health care and to the local Social Services, and the rest to the person themselves. I have professional knowledge of both and to be honest I would say that it is at least 80% inefficient, it doesn't particularly meld well, there are gaps in the seams and too many have slipped through the net that was meant to protect. It requires review IMO and if it were my decision I would instigate a whole new concept of diagnosis, prescribing and care.

www.devon.gov.uk...

Governments basically diluted the already weakened localised Health Care infrastructures by floods of unsustainable immigration, saturating the system until there were not enough beds in hospitals, provision for Mental Health care, amongst most other facets of health care, within the system, or the provision for new care centres being built. These were government decisions.

The USA has similar community care provisions

en.wikipedia.org...


The World Health Organization states that community mental health services are more accessible and effective, lessen social exclusion, and are likely to have less possibilities for the neglect and violations of human rights that were often encountered in mental hospitals. However, WHO notes that in many countries, the closing of mental hospitals has not been accompanied by the development of community services, leaving a service vacuum with far too many not receiving any care.[2] New legal powers have developed in some countries, such as the United States, to supervise and ensure compliance with treatment of individuals living in the community, known as outpatient commitment or assisted outpatient treatment or community treatment orders.

edit on 27-12-2012 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 07:28 AM
link   
Aren't there already threads on ATS about this. The only difference in the OP of this thread is directly linking SSRI to RECENT events, that the OP clearly mentions though the posters on the thread aren't allowed to mention.

www.abovetopsecret.com...''Antidepressants To Blame For "ALL" Mass Shootings? '' this thread from 16/12/12

www.abovetopsecret.com... ''Antidepressant Drugs Causing Epidemic of Mania'' this thread from earlier this year

www.abovetopsecret.com...
''Anti Depressants, SSRI's, Suicides, Rash of Recent Killings,'' this thread has lots of posts and information

www.abovetopsecret.com...
''Evidence THEY Program The Killers (Or Remote-Control Them)''

www.abovetopsecret.com...
''Psychiatrists expose the fraud of Psychiatry''
edit on 27-12-2012 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-12-2012 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by DYepes
 


Dear DYepes,
I agree, but unfortunately without a study of nutjobs who didn't take medication and committed violent crimes versus a study of nutjobs who DID take SSRIs and committed violent crimes, the common factor is them being nutjobs.

I stand by my statement, I don't think it is the drugs I think it is simply the mental state they were in prior to taking the drugs and society as a whole. Until I read something, and not in the MSM mind, that suggests otherwise i'll continue to think the same way.

Before SSRIs did we have less cases of violent outbreaks? You would need some very long studies to be able to make the link of violent outbreaks to SSRIs versus other factors, wouldn't you agree?

All that we can say is that almost all cases of violent outbreaks were linked to people with psychological or mental disorders, that's the point i'm making. Irrespective of the drugs. Were we to give SSRIs to people without mental issues would they go off unhinged killing people? Now there is the real question I think.

Edit - I'd also appreciate if you're going to retort you fully address the points I make and not a sub section. Would you not agree that the root cause is society as a whole, and the factors I pointed out?

T



edit on 27-12-2012 by torqpoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
It's sad that we live in a world where people are too naive to question their doctors about the medication and diagnosis they've been given. Doctors do make mistakes and I think non-prescription alternatives should be exhausted before medication is prescribed. People shouldn't accept popping pills as their only option.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
dup post removed
edit on Thu Dec 27 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
dup post removed
edit on Thu Dec 27 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by jessasaurusreeex
It's sad that we live in a world where people are too naive to question their doctors about the medication and diagnosis they've been given. Doctors do make mistakes and I think non-prescription alternatives should be exhausted before medication is prescribed. People shouldn't accept popping pills as their only option.


nanu..

there are poppers all over the world its very sad, weak minded are easy to trick to do sick actions, enforced actions made and planned by others..

doctors earn more cash by selling legal drugs, (trademark drugs..) that's also sad



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by torqpoc
reply to post by DYepes
 


Dear DYepes,
I agree, but unfortunately without a study of nutjobs who didn't take medication and committed violent crimes versus a study of nutjobs who DID take SSRIs and committed violent crimes, the common factor is them being nutjobs.

I stand by my statement, I don't think it is the drugs I think it is simply the mental state they were in prior to taking the drugs and society as a whole. Until I read something, and not in the MSM mind, that suggests otherwise i'll continue to think the same way.

Before SSRIs did we have less cases of violent outbreaks? You would need some very long studies to be able to make the link of violent outbreaks to SSRIs versus other factors, wouldn't you agree?

All that we can say is that almost all cases of violent outbreaks were linked to people with psychological or mental disorders, that's the point i'm making. Irrespective of the drugs. Were we to give SSRIs to people without mental issues would they go off unhinged killing people? Now there is the real question I think.

Edit - I'd also appreciate if you're going to retort you fully address the points I make and not a sub section. Would you not agree that the root cause is society as a whole, and the factors I pointed out?

T


Yes, in fact I can agree that society is a big factor. But try to keep an open mind on the effect of drugs. We all know the illegal ones such as PCP, Meth, and Cocaine can really put sane people who have no mental health issues to do some of the most unthinkable things possible, and I believe we have all heard the stories at some point or another. Maybe not so much Cocaine but definetly the meth and angel dust. Why would it be a stretch to link SSRI's to increased likelihood of violent behvaior? It looks quite clear from the ops sources that the studies are now being done to find the correlation, and yes while it may be the case that not all people on SSRI's are prone to the violence, the source articles paint a very disturbing trend. I am going to meet halfway and side with a statement made earlier.


Originally posted by ~Lucidity
I'm not sure anyone's mentioned yet that coming OFF of some of the medications abruptly or improperly can be even more harmful than being on them. One example is Xanax, which I've read stopping cold turkey can cause a psychotic break.

And again, how does it happen that so many are so over-medicated? .Ask the doctors. You know. The ones in bed with big pharma and the lawmakers.


It may be possible the nutjobs who committ mass murders have been subject to improper treatment with such medication. How can it be proven if the perps of these crimes maybe had either over consumed their prescription and then had to deal without it, or simply lost or was cutoff? Maybe this is in fact where the answer lies, the sudden loss or no access to their meds for an extended period of time?



new topics

top topics



 
175
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join