ADHD-Report.com
  

Home


Candlelight Project - Biopsychiatry Illuminated

ADHD
ADHD 2
Mind / Body
Loch Ness Monster
Ritalin
George Bush
Compulsion
Rebranding Disease
MindFreedom
DSM IV
MindFreedom 2
APA Resignation
Chemical Imbalance
Encephalitis
ADHD Diagnosis
ADHD Brain Scans
Schizophrenia
APA Funding
Medicating Normality
Medicating Normality 2
Pseudo-Science
Pseudo-Science 2
Pseudo-Science 3
Pseudo-Science 4
CPS and Psychiatry
Teacher Diagnosis
Official Story
Damage of Labels
Evidential Reasoning
Curate's Egg
Abolishing Psychiatry
Health Care
ADHD Drugs
PR Industry
Protecting Children
Ritalin Safety
School Psychiatry
Dr. Thomas Szasz
Parent's Extracts
International Consensus Statement

Parenting Tips Newsletter

Resources

Letter from the author

Contact

Biopsychiatry Illuminated

THE CANDLELIGHT PROJECT
by Bob Collier

10 August 2003
Issue 54

Here are some interesting numbers that the light of my candle of exploration fell upon this week! They reminded me of an aspect of so-called 'ADHD' that has struck me as very curious.

Firstly, something from the 'Did You Know?' page of the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations website:

"Over 85,000 pharmaceutical industry scientists in Europe are today searching for new cures and innovative therapies for cancer, heart disease, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, arthritis, osteoporosis, cystic fibrosis, HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases, to name but a few."

Then, from an article called 'Quest for the Presidency', dated September 22, 2000:

"In the heart of the Florida battleground thick with senior voters, George W. Bush was proposing to spend $67 billion over a decade on a "medical moonshot" to boost the public and private search for cures of fatal diseases.

The figure includes $35 billion already in the Republican presidential candidate's budget. It also includes increasing the budget of the National Cancer Institute to $5.1 billion by 2003."

Now, in the first of the two snippets of information, it doesn't specify how many of those scientists are looking for cures and how many are simply looking for "innovative therapies" - but, let's use Pareto's Principle, for the sake of argument, and say that 20% of them are looking for cures: that's around 17,000 scientists actively searching for cures for a variety of diseases. At the same time, that's only talking about scientists in Europe and only within the pharmaceutical industry in Europe.

The $67 billion over a decade promised by President-to-be George W. Bush for the "public and private search for cures of fatal diseases" gives us a clue as to how many scientists in America are likely to be involved in the search for cures. As you can see, $5.1 billion is being invested in a search for a cure for cancer alone.

I don't think, then, that I'm stretching the idea too much if I suggest that, worldwide and generally speaking, there are probably tens of thousands of scientists backed by huge amounts of funding who are currently actively searching for cures for a variety of relatively common diseases.

It seems to me that, in the eyes of its proponents at least, 'ADHD' clearly qualifies as a relatively common 'disease'. After all, more than 5 million children worldwide are 'afflicted' with it and that number is apparently increasing alarmingly. The numbers are frequently referred to as "of epidemic proportions", in fact.

So, how many scientists are there in the world today looking for a cure for 'ADHD'?

Well, as far as I'm aware, there aren't any.

I do know of some scientists who are searching for a 'better' explanation of its 'cause' (it's up to them, of course, if they want to spend their valuable time barking up the wrong tree!), but nobody that I know of is ACTIVELY SEARCHING FOR A CURE.

Isn't that strange?

'ADHD' is allegedly a 'disease', but - even though probably tens of thousands of scientists around the world are diligently searching for cures for a whole range of other 'diseases' - it seems that nobody is interested in looking for a 'cure' for THIS particular 'disease'. And, as far as I can make out, nobody has EVER looked for a 'cure' for 'ADHD'.

Perhaps, then, 'ADHD' is 'incurable'. Is THAT what its proponents are claiming - that it's incurable?

Well, I've never personally encountered anybody who's ever said that. Certainly, some people have talked about the potential for 'ADHD' to continue into adulthood and become a lifelong 'condition', but always in a context of how best to 'control the symptoms'. In nine months of exploring the subject of 'ADHD' - that includes visiting dozens of websites, posting at several online forums, reading a small mountain of articles and exchanging possibly a couple of hundred emails in total with a number of different people - I've never yet found a proponent of 'ADHD' who has so much as MENTIONED the small but relevant matter of whether it can be CURED or not. Indeed, the fact that a 'disease' can have a 'cure' - by definition - appears, in the case of 'ADHD', to have been completely overlooked.

Don't you think that's weird? I do.

Here we have a supposed 'disease' that nobody is claiming is incurable, therefore, presumably, it's curable - but, nobody's looking for a cure. Instead, it seems that psychiatrists, doctors and teachers would rather content themselves with 'controlling the symptoms' indefinitely through the administration of potentially harmful drugs.

Remember, incidentally, that these potentially harmful drugs are being given to children as young as 18 months.

If you haven't yet read Barry Turner's article "ADHD and the Meaning of Evidence", I recommend that you do. You'll find it right here:
http://www.cultureshocktv.com/internews/2002/jun3200365685.shtml



 
ADHD-Report.com: The concerned parents' guide to childrens' attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD/ADD)
Contact
Resources