Parents—Know Your Rights | CCHRINT

Parents—Know Your Rights

Parents—Know Your Rights

Watch the video below, featuring Dr. Mary Ann Block, author of No More ADHD

About ‘ADHD’ & Child Mental Disorders:

“Virtually anyone at any given time can meet the criteria for bipolar disorder or ADHD.  Anyone.  And the problem is everyone diagnosed with even one of these ‘illnesses’ triggers the pill dispenser.” — Dr. Stefan Kruszewski, Psychiatrist

Parents are quite simply not being given accurate information about psychiatric labels (mental disorders) or the drugs being prescribed to ‘treat’ their children.  This is fact: There are no medical tests in existence that can prove ADHD or any other  mental disorder is a physical abnormality, brain dysfunction, chemical imbalance or genetic abnormality. Period.  Even the National Institute of Health Consensus (NIH) issued a statement admitting, “We do not have an independent, valid test for ADHD, and there is no data to indicate that ADHD is due to a brain malfunction.”

Millions of children have been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), BiPolar disorder, OCD, Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD)and many other psychiatric labels (diagnosis) none of which are supported by medical test or confirmed as physical malfunctions (disease) by science.  Parents are simply told their child is mentally ill and more often than not, told to place their child on psychiatric drugs, including ADHD drugs which the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration categorizes in the same class of highly addictive substances as cocaine, morphine and opium. They are not being provided with non-harmful, non-drug solutions for problems of attention, mood or behavior.

The purpose of this page is to give parents facts about mental disorders, psychiatric drug risks, and non-harmful medical alternatives to psychiatric labels and drugs.

The first thing parents should know is that there are no medical tests that can prove your child is “mentally ill” and any diagnosis of mental disorder is based solely on opinion—in fact, a simple checklist of behaviors.  Therefore, if a psychiatrist or doctor says your child has a “mental disorder” and needs to be on “medication” (drugs):

1) Demand to see the lab test, brain scan, blood test or X-ray that proves your child has a mental disorder—(there isn’t one) that would require drug “treatment”

You can also print off this page, with psychiatrists and doctors admitting there is no medical test for any mental disorder and no evidence that any “mental disorder” is a medical condition

2) If drugs are recommended for your child, print off summaries of international drug warnings/studies on whatever type of drug is being recommended and provide this to the doctor/psychiatrist recommending drugs and ask if they are aware of the international studies and warnings on these drug risks (unfortunately, many doctors get their information on drugs safety from Pharmaceutical representatives)

For ADHD Drug Warnings and Studies click here

For ANTIDEPRESSANT Drug Warnings and Studies click here

For ANTIPSYCHOTIC Drug Warnings and Studies click here

For ANTIANXIETY Drug Warnings and Studies click here

Or to find studies and warnings on specific brand name drugs such as Ritalin, Paxil, Adderall, Concerta, Zoloft, Risperdal, simply type in name of the drug inCCHR’s Psychiatric Drug Side Effects Search Engine here

3) If the psychiatrist/doctor provides you with what they claim is evidence of a ‘mental disorder’ forward this claim to CCHR Internationalhere— and we will provide you with the evidence that whatever claim is being made, is false.

4) There are non-harmful, non-drug medical alternatives to treating children’s problems with mood, attention and behavior that do not require a stigmatizing psychiatric label (not based on science or medicine but strictly on opinion) or a dangerous drug. You have the right to know about these- and to ask your doctor about non-drug treatments. You also have the right to get a second opinion. Click here for more information (watch the video below and/or scroll to the bottom of this page)

Dr. Mary Ann Block, Author of No More ADHD

—————————————————

ABOUT SCHOOL CHILDREN – WHAT PARENTS NEED TO KNOW – SCHOOLS CANNOT PRESSURE OR COERCE YOU TO DRUG YOUR CHILD AS A CONDITION OF ATTENDING SCHOOL

Did you know—Federal Law Prohibits School Personnel from Requiring You to Drug Your Child?

Most parents are unaware that schools cannot require a child to take a psychiatric drug as a condition of attending school. Any coercion or pressure put on the parent violates federal law. This law came about following CCHR’s documentation of numerous cases of parents being coerced/pressured or forced to give their children psychiatric drugs by school personnel, including parents charged with medical neglect for refusing to give their child a psychiatric drug. CCHR spearheaded a national campaign on this issue and by working directly with parents and the press, this issue was brought before state and federal legislators resulting in the Prohibition on Mandatory Medication Amendment which passed into federal law in 2004, prohibiting schools from requiring a child take a psychiatric drug as a requisite for attending school.

If a teacher or other school employee has concerns about or objects to your child’s behavior or academic performance, they are prevented by this law from pressuring you to put your child on a prescription drug and they cannot stop your child from being in school if you refuse to drug him or her. Click here for the portion of the law that you can print out and use as needed.

You can also use the below forms for parents and students of legal age to sign and present to preschools, elementary and secondary schools and colleges. They are an advance directive against having mental health screening conducted on students that could lead to them being referred for psychiatric drug treatment.

Parent’s Exemption Form Prior to Mental Health and Psychological Screening or Counseling.

Student Exemption Form Prior to Mental Health and Psychological Screening or Counseling.

ABOUT PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS

Click image for more drug information

Common Psychiatric Drugs Being Given to Children Are Documented by International Drug Regulatory Agencies to Cause Heart Attack, Stroke, Diabetes, Hallucinations, Violence, Mania, Homicide, Aggression, Depression, Suicide and Death

This is not opinion. This is documented fact by international drug regulatory agencies. Parents are quite simply not given the documented facts about the psychiatric drugs prescribed for their children, yet it is their right to have full information about any drugs being prescribed their child. ADHD drugs,Antidepressants, Antipsychotics and Anti-Anxiety Drugs given to children, have been documented by hundreds of drug regulatory agencies to have severe and life-threatening side effects. Children are commonly prescribed drugs such asRitalin, Adderall, Concerta, Paxil, Prozac, Celexa, Zoloft, Luvox, Risperdal,Seroquel and parents are not given any warning on the known dangers of these drugs. It is for this reason that CCHR created a simple, easy to understandsearch engine on psychiatric drugs which provides documented side effects, drug warnings, studies and adverse reaction reports filed with the FDA in a simplified format.

ABOUT PSYCHIATRIC DISORDERS

Contrary to Popular Belief—The Doctor Doesn’t Always Know Best

The child drugging epidemic that has resulted in infants, toddlers, foster children, and a total of 20 million children on psychiatric drugs rests on one fraudulent premise; that mental disorders are biological “diseases” therefore justifying the administration of mind-altering drugs. The falsity of this premise is easily established by the fact that there is not one medical or scientific test that can prove any child has a mental disorder. Not one. Behaviors are not diseases and drugs are not medication. This isn’t to say that children don’t have emotional or behavioral problems, it is saying that without evidence of disease—a physical disease—children are simply being drugged to change their behavior. Psychiatrists know this—they admit this, their own literature admits as much. But they like to keep these facts to themselves.For more information on psychiatric diagnosis, click here.

ABOUT NON-HARMFUL SOLUTIONS AVAILABLE FOR PARENTS

There Are Non Harmful, Non-Drug Solutions for Parents

There are numerous alternatives to psychiatric diagnoses and treatment, including standard medical care that does not require a stigmatizing and subjective psychiatric label or a mind-altering drug. Although CCHR International does not condone or promote any specific practitioner, medical organization, practice or group, we have found the below resources to be helpful for individuals looking for more information on the following topics:

Safe Harbor — Find medical doctors (by zip code) who will treat people including children without the use of psychiatric drugs.http://www.alternativementalhealth.com/directory/search.asp

The Block Center — Find and treat underlying health problems in children and information on how children can safely get off of psychiatric drugs.http://www.blockcenter.com

DrugFreeChildren.org — Informational website on issues surrounding the use of “chemical restraints” on children. http://www.drugfreechildren.org

The Doris J. Rapp Education Corporation — Vital information on environmental factors affecting health in children and adults.http://www.drrapp.com

AbleChild — Parents for A Label and Drug Free Education.http://www.ablechild.org

American Academy of Environmental Medicine — Promotes optimum health through prevention and safe and effective treatments.http://www.aaemonline.org

Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry — Lead Toxicity: What Are the Physiologic Effects of Lead Exposure?http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/lead/pbphysiologic_effects2.html

First Long Term Study Released on Pigs, Cattle Who Eat GMO Soy

First Long Term Study Released on Pigs, Cattle Who Eat GMO Soy and Corn Offers Frightening Results | NationofChange

The derisory politics behind the GMO subject are perpetuated through the UK Minster’s praise of genetically altered foods. He has even said, in the face of these findings, that GMO offers, “most wonderful opportunities to improve human health.” With scientific evidence like this provided by scientists who aren’t funded by Monsanto and GMO corporations, the world has an opportunity to see just how malevolent these institutions are, who develop and disseminate these altered, health-killing crops.

Joining the Dots

Joining the Dots: The EU is designed to protect patents and corporate control – not the health and interests of its citizens | EU Referendum Initiative | www.EU-Referendum.org
The European Commission's Directorate General for Health and Consumers claims that its job is to "help make Europe's citizens healthier, safer and more confident." In reality however, and as more and more people are beginning to discover, the European Union's primary concerns are not those of ordinary citizens but rather the interests of multi-billion euro European corporations and their patents on health-endangering products such as GMO seeds, pharmaceutical drugs, artificial food additives and pesticides.

Appendix Isn't Useless at All

Appendix Isn't Useless at All: It's a Safe House for Bacteria - DukeHealth.org

DURHAM, NC -- Long denigrated as vestigial or useless, the appendix now appears to have a reason to be -- as a "safe house" for the beneficial bacteria living in the human gut.

Drawing upon a series of observations and experiments, Duke University Medical Center investigators postulate that the beneficial bacteria in the appendix that aid digestion can ride out a bout of diarrhea that completely evacuates the intestines and emerge afterward to repopulate the gut. Their theory appears online in the Journal of Theoretical Biology.

"While there is no smoking gun, the abundance of circumstantial evidence makes a strong case for the role of the appendix as a place where the good bacteria can live safe and undisturbed until they are needed," said William Parker, PhD, assistant professor of experimental surgery, who conducted the analysis in collaboration with R. Randal Bollinger, MD, PhD, Duke professor emeritus in general surgery.

The appendix is a slender two- to four-inch pouch located near the juncture of the large and small intestines. While its exact function in humans has been debated by physicians, it is known that there is immune system tissue in the appendix.

The gut is populated with different microbes that help the digestive system break down the foods we eat. In return, the gut provides nourishment and safety to the bacteria. Parker now believes that the immune system cells found in the appendix are there to protect, rather than harm, the good bacteria.

For the past ten years, Parker has been studying the interplay of these bacteria in the bowels, and in the process has documented the existence in the bowel of what is known as a biofilm. This thin and delicate layer is an amalgamation of microbes, mucous and immune system molecules living together atop of the lining the intestines.

"Our studies have indicated that the immune system protects and nourishes the colonies of microbes living in the biofilm," Parkers explained. "By protecting these good microbes, the harmful microbes have no place to locate. We have also shown that biofilms are most pronounced in the appendix and their prevalence decreases moving away from it."

This new function of the appendix might be envisioned if conditions in the absence of modern health care and sanitation are considered, Parker said.

"Diseases causing severe diarrhea are endemic in countries without modern health and sanitation practices, which often results in the entire contents of the bowels, including the biofilms, being flushed from the body," Parker said. He added that the appendix's location and position is such that it is expected to be relatively difficult for anything to enter it as the contents of the bowels are emptied.

"Once the bowel contents have left the body, the good bacteria hidden away in the appendix can emerge and repopulate the lining of the intestine before more harmful bacteria can take up residence," Parker continued. "In industrialized societies with modern medical care and sanitation practices, the maintenance of a reserve of beneficial bacteria may not be necessary. This is consistent with the observation that removing the appendix in modern societies has no discernable negative effects."

Several decades ago, scientists suggested that people in industrialized societies might have such a high rate of appendicitis because of the so-called "hygiene hypothesis," Parker said. This hypothesis posits that people in "hygienic" societies have higher rates of allergy and perhaps autoimmune disease because they -- and hence their immune systems -- have not been as challenged during everyday life by the host of parasites or other disease-causing organisms commonly found in the environment. So when these immune systems are challenged, they can over-react.

"This over-reactive immune system may lead to the inflammation associated with appendicitis and could lead to the obstruction of the intestines that causes acute appendicitis," Parker said. "Thus, our modern health care and sanitation practices may account not only for the lack of a need for an appendix in our society, but also for much of the problems caused by the appendix in our society."

Parker conducted a deductive study because direct examination the appendix's function would be difficult. Other than humans, the only mammals known to have appendices are rabbits, opossums and wombats, and their appendices are markedly different than the human appendix.

Parker's overall research into the existence and function of biofilms is supported by the National Institutes of Health. Other Duke members of the team were Andrew Barbas, Errol Bush, and Shu Lin.

OperationPaperclip.info

OperationPaperclip.info
Of particular interest were scientists specialising in aerodynamics and rocketry (such as those involved in the V-1 and V-2 projects), chemical weapons, chemical reaction technology and medicine. These scientists and their families were secretly brought to the United States, without State Department review and approval. The majority of the scientists, numbering almost 500, were deployed at White Sands Proving Ground, New Mexico, Fort Bliss, Texas and Huntsville, Alabama to work on guided missile and ballistic missile technology. This in turn led to the foundation of NASA and the US ICBM program

Thoughts on the intersection of search, media, technology, and more.

John Battelle's Search Blog | Thoughts on the intersection of search, media, technology, and more.
It’s been pretty obvious from the stock price, but LinkedIn, which I’ve written about every so often, is really on a roll lately. The influencer content play (which I will admit I’ve been part of, in a small way) is a clear winner, the company is enjoying very positive press, and its premium services are getting really interesting as well.

Just today I got an email from the company titled “What’s new with people you know?” I found it compelling in a way that emails from nearly every other service I use – Twitter, Facebook, or Google – are not.  CEO Jeff Weiner tells me that this email has been sent out every six months for the past three years, but it’s clearly been redesigned as more of a media product. I care about my network on LinkedIn, and the email was full of pictures of people who really matter to me, all of whom have gotten new jobs.  It’s  one of the most engaging messages I’ve ever gotten from a “social network.” (In case you want some history, I called LinkedIn out as a media company more than a year ago  here.)

KK* Lifestream

Kevin Kelly -- KK* Lifestream
The farmers in rural China have chosen cell phones and twitter over toilets and running water. To them, this is not a hypothetical choice at all, but a real one. and they have made their decision in massive numbers. Tens of millions, maybe hundreds of millions, if not billions of people in the rest of Asia, Africa and South America have chosen Option B. You can go to almost any African village to see this. And it is not because they are too poor to afford a toilet. As you can see from these farmers' homes in Yunnan, they definitely could have at least built an outhouse if they found it valuable. (I know they don't have a toilet because I've stayed in many of their homes.) But instead they found the intangible benefits of connection to be greater than the physical comforts of running water.