And an interesting footnote here is that the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation provides a lot of funding for NPR and PBS (as in the producers of "The Infinite Mind") and I'm pretty sure this is the same Johnson that's in Johnson & Johnson. What a tangled web we weave! Let's hope Harvard gets on this and actually does something about Biederman.

okay this is serious shit and it's great that it's coming out...

but the highlight of this piece for me was:

Sounds like Biederman is an adult version of the little boys he urges Americans to medicate.

you made me laugh out loud! and in this climate laughter is a priceless commodity...

I think you hit on something very valid though...it just struck me that psychiatrists are probably projecting their fear of their own demons on us all the time...it's really quite brilliant!!

Sad, these behaviors are labeled healthy leadership skills in the privileged like Biederman and genetic defects in the powerless like children.

And now for the apologists who still thing psych labels and drugs are life saving.

JANET WOZNIAK AND Joseph BIEDERMAN did a study on children 5-14 years old trialing Risperdal in 1999.

It's all in my OCD>ADHD>Childhood BP series.

It's connect the dots time, people need to pay attention to what has been written here, it's easy to research, and it's unfortunately predictable of late: this industry IS A HEALTH HAZARD TO CHILDREN.

Dear Philip:

Great reporting Philip!

And we can chalk another one up for the wonderful miracle of psychiatry.

Of course this will be chalked up to anecdotal evidence by those making the Big Bucks off the fantasy and mythological child bipolar diagnosis. I mean what the heck! Biederman's a good Guy, Nemernut's is a good guy, Kay Jamison is a good girl, the FDA is a fine and proper organization looking out for us too, and let’s not leave out that old Goodwin being a good guy also! Yeah they are good all right! Good at killing and destroying kids!

Keep those posts coming in you ardent believers in the myth! You'll have nothing but blind faith to go on by now! Sure makes your arguments asking for more skewed data sound pretty silly don't you think?

Yours truly,
Stan

Sounds like this kid could use some help!

http://www.privacy.es.tc

How many other drugs get to market in this fashion 10, 20 ,30 percent?... who knows? no wonder more and more disease of the mind and body evolve we make up disorders and pump our faces full of untrustworthy products and make things worse or create new problems because our chemistries are so out of whack

Your link is currently bad

here are the correct ones

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/25/health/25psych.html?pagewanted=print

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/25/health/25psych.html?pagewanted=all

keep up the good woork

NOTE: THANKS. HOWEVER THE LINK I HAVE ON MY SITE WORKED FOR ME JUST NOW. NOT SURE WHAT THE DEAL IS, BUT THAT'S BEEN A TRICKY LINK ALL DAY. IF PEOPLE ARE HAVING PROBLEMS USE THESE ABOVE LINKS OR PRESS CLEAR CACHE ON YOUR BROWSER AND PRESS RELOAD.

PHILIP

J and J can be found all over. Sorry to report that a J and J intern was working in Obama's Senate office as a health go to.

Didn't Risperdal get approval for children with autism? Only Risperdal? Wonder if Biederman and Co. had anything to do with it.

And , since the iron is hot, thanks to Grassley, Gardiner, etc. shouldn't we be leaning on Congress, Obama, to put black box warnings on the atypicals for children? They all want to be approved for children, they all are already being used for children, but the SSRI success in getting a black box warning reduced - as I understand it - use of that class in children. We could call it the "Biederman Project."

Joseph Biederman needs to resign from all duties.

Biederman and Wozniak trial Risperdal in children in 1999.

Dear Philip:

SPAM ALERT! TWO GOT THROUGH ON THIS THREAD SO FAR!

Stan

Par for the course for these guys. It's remarkable how they manage to get away with this.

Yes, we need a Black Box Warning on the atypicals for chldren/adolescents. As was said, if we can get Grassley, Gardiner, etc., keeping up the pressure, there might be a meeting of the FDA Advisory Committee on this just as there was on the antidepressants for children.

Still, I guess people don't "get it" about the Black Box warning for youth & antidepressants.

Tonight I watched a T.V. show which touched on two cases in the news of children who killed themselves - one was the case of the 13 year old girl whose girlfriend's mother posed as a young boy and made terribly insulting remarks to her over the Internet. The 13 year old girl committed suicide. She was on the SSRI antidepressant Celexa. This means she was two to three times more likely to have suicidal behaviors according to the Black Box. But nobody on the T.V. show brought up this fact. It was just all about the girlfriend's mother and how cruel she was. If the T.V. people had been allowed to say it, they would have mentioned the Black Box. They would also have mentioned that one of the adverse effects of Celexa is "rejection sensitivity". This, to me, is a bigger factor in the 13 year old girl's suicide than the mean girlfirend's mother.

The second case that was aired was about the 19 year old boy who killed himself on the Internet using a Webcam where people watched him. The focus here was "why didn't someone call the police sooner". Of course, they should have but most thought he was play acting as he had threatened suicide before on the Net. What was NOT mentioned was that he was taking the SSRI antidepressant Lexapro. Since he was only 19, he, too, was covered by the Black Box Warning. Nobody on the T.V. show brought up this fact.

So what good is the Black Box if everybody ignores it.

As for Biederman, I am thrilled to see him get this bad publicity from the New York Times. Bet he is really mad. He is probably worried that his gravy train is going to run dry. I wonder how many children besides 4 year old Rebecca Riley have died from Biederman's assininities.

Your last line is great:

I wonder what apologists for the bipolar kids paradigm make of these revelations.

They'll probably ignore it just like anything else that doesn't agree with their view of themselves as benevolent helpers.

I just found your blog and very much admire it. I'm a Ph.D. who has long wondered (for 10+ years) why Biederman's faulty science has not been caught sooner by scientific insiders. Anyone who reads his papers closely can see that they are a lot of smoke and mirrors concealing poor methodology. It's all out there clear as day, so why has it taken until now for other scientists to see through it? Clearly there are issues in the peer review process. In part, it seems to be that the problems in his work are more clear when you read many of his papers together in series--then the kinds of things he is doing become clear. For instance, in many of his ADHD papers, he re-presents the same data on the same kids multiple times in multiple papers, which makes the literature look like there's an blizzard of support for his theories, but really he's just got the same hundred-or-so kids and the same data points that he's presenting again and again, which any beginner knows doesn't prove bupkis. However, few folks have called him on this.

Thanks for helping spread the word.

"'Dr. Biederman... has a very short fuse...'"

If Mr Bruins is correct, I would question the propriety of having Bimblebaum anywhere near children.

Matt