ADHD: TOTAL, 100% FRAUD
By Fred A. Baughman Jr., Neurologist, Pediatric Neurologist
Pediatrician/author/ T. Barry Brazelton [Washington Times, 3/?/03], breaths life into the lie/illusion of ADHD as a “disease”/ “chemical imbalance”--one needing a “chemical balancer”--Ritalin, Adderall—amphetamines-all!
All physicians (psychiatrists included) study the normal (no disease) and abnormal (disease) and are responsible for telling one from the other. When no abnormality/disease is present, there is nothing to make normal; no need for medical treatment. A third to a half of patients seek help for psychological/psychiatric symptoms, and have no abnormality/disease.
Psychiatry and neurology were formally separated in 1948, psychiatry to deal with the emotional and behavioral problems of physically/medically normal individuals, and neurology to deal with physical/medical abnormalities of the nervous system.
With the production of psychiatric drugs in the 50’s and 60’s, the psycho-pharm cartel began calling all things mental “diseases”—“chemical imbalances.” The American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) grew from 112 “diseases” in 1952, to 374 in the 1994—all invented. ADHD was it’s prototypical “biologically-based” “disease.”
In a 1970, Congressional hearing psychiatrists insisted that “hyperkinesis” (a.k.a. ADHD)—was a disease.
Peters of the
ADD was invented in 1980, but never validated as a disease.
ADHD was invented in 1987, but never validated as a disease. The epidemic, nonetheless, had reached a half million.
In 1990, Alan Zametkin of the NIMH, using PET scans, reported that ADD brains used 8% less glucose than normals. But there was still had no test; diagnosis was based on parents/teacher interviews. What’s more, no one could duplicate Zametkin’s findings. But this didn’t stop Ciba/Novartis, CHADD, or psychiatry, generally, from chanting the “disease” claim.
In their best seller, Driven to Distraction  Edward Hallowell and John Ratey, proclaimed: “… there is enough evidence that neurochemical systems are altered in people with ADD…”
Speaking of the PET evidence and knowing that no such thing had been confirmed, the NIMH  proclaimed: “the brain areas that control attention used less glucose…”
Turning to CT scans, Nasrallah, et al  found brain atrophy (shrinkage) in 58% of young adults with ADHD, but cautioned “.. since all of the patients had been treated with psychostimulants, cortical atrophy may be a long-term adverse effect of this treatment.”
From 1986-1998, nine MRI brain scan studies were performed on “treated” groups with ADHD. All showed brain atrophy and all concluded that the brain atrophy was due to ADHD. The possibility that their “treatment” was the cause of the brain atrophy was dismissed.
Had psychiatry and the NIMH truly sought to find abnormalities in ADHD they would have scanned untreated individuals. However, in 12 years (1986-1998) of brain scan research, they failed, or refused, to do even one such study. They did, however, persist in their claims that the brain atrophy invariably found, but always in “treated” subjects, was proof that ADHD was a brain disease. Was this on purpose? Was it marketplace strategy?
At the 1998, National Institutes of Health, ADHD, Consensus Conference, James Swanson and F. Xavier Castellanos, of the NIMH, concluded: “…investigations provide converging evidence that …ADHD… is characterized by reduced size in specific neuroanatomical regions of the frontal lobes and basal ganglia.” But they uttered not a single word about all of the ADHD subjects having been “treated”.
Baughman, an invited participant, asked: “Dr. Swanson, why didn’t you mention that virtually all of the ADHD subjects… have been on chronic stimulant therapy and that this is the likely cause of their brain atrophy?”
Swanson: “I understand that this is a critical issue and in fact I am planning a study to investigate that. I haven’t yet done it.” (referring to the failure/reluctance to study an ADHD-untreated group since the beginning of brain scan research in the early eighties.)
William B.Carey testified: “What is now most often described as ADHD…appears to be a set of normal behavioral variations … This discrepancy leaves the validity of the construct (ADHD) in doubt.”
Four additional MRI studies have been published between 1998 and the present—all, you guessed it, utilizing “treated” ADHD subjects, all affirming, time and again, that Ritalin/amphetamine “treatment” causes brain atrophy, not that ADHD is a disease.
Dr. Brazelton should have read this “research” literature. With the ADHD epidemic at 6-7 million today, most of them “treated,” there is still no proof that ADHD is a disease, and, of course, absolutely no objective means of diagnosing it.
Psychiatric research has yet to prove me wrong.
Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD, Neurology, Pediatric Neurology (board certified)
619 440 8236