Read the entire presentation here
I’ve started collecting old electroshock books before they disappear and/or their prices skyrocket. Last year I bought a copy Electro-shock and its Brain-Disabling Effects, originally published in 1979.
This book is a vital read. It shows how far back shock induced brain damaged evidence was available, how this information was softened, skewed or ignored by the industry, provides patient accounts, detailed descriptions of physical and cognitive effects and its wealth of citations serves an additional research resource.
Recently I was poking around Peter Breggin’s ECT Resource Center and found that he made the complete book available free via PDF–yay!
Even though I already own the book, it’s hard for me to process because it’s highly technical and I struggle with reading and retaining new info after ECT wrecked my brain.
But with a PDF copy, I can run it through my screen reader and can easily highlight and review points I want to remember.
You can download the PDF here.
And if have the same reading/retaining troubles I do and are interested in using assistive technology, check out VoiceDream.
It’s the best screen reader I’ve ever used. It’s easy to add content, there’s a ton of realistic voices to choose from, and the app is customizable.
The APA is employing a popular tactic of playing the victim to “anti-psychiatry movement.”
That term carries unflattering stigma.
The anti-psychiatry movement is portrayed as anti-science, fringe quackery, and consisting of only Scientologists and busy bodies who are interfering with doctors ability to soundly treat suffering mental patients.
The majority of the anti-psychiatry movement are people who themselves or their loved ones have been grievously harmed or killed by unscientific, dangerous treatments such as drugs and electroshock. People who don’t who aren’t treated as credible because of the diagnoses they have been given, often have limited resources for legal recourse- not that they would be taken seriously any ways.
These “anti-psychiatry” people have lost everything and bravely choose to speak out so others may be saved from this iatrogenic suffering and so the public and government can be made aware so justice can be served and protective changes made.
Psychiatry doesn’t look so noble when you put this tactic in its correct context. It’s is a well funded bully with the blind support of people taught that doctors are always good and trust worthy and their treatments scientifically sound.
Do they really care about their patients? All you need to know is look at how they treat those they harm who are be brave enough to speak out against them.
I was irrevocably injured by psychiatry. I was uniformed of the risks. I don’t want what happened to me to happen to other people-they need to be warned of the dangers, especially since psychiatry is unwilling to do so.
I think those who knowingly cover up, ignore or deny harm caused by their treatments should be held accountable along with watchdog agencies like the FDA for choosing special interests over upholding their duty to protect people.
If what I say sounds reasonable- if you agree patients deserve to be informed and protected against dangerous psychiatric interventions, and organizations like the FDA should follow their governing rules then please sign and this subversive, “anti-psychiatry” petition:
When it comes to ECT, the only stories that matter to mainstream media are the “it saved my life!” ones. Those who have claim injury and/or abuse are ignored, discredited and disregarded in any ECT discussion.
“your imagining things, you are mentally ill, after all”
“your a rare case and don’t represent the majority”
“if doctors forced you to have it, you probably needed it”
This blind invalidation needs to stop.
It’s time these accounts are treated as valid.
It’s time people keep asking questions–even when someone throws down a Suzie Success Story.
All personal accounts matter- not just “happy” ones.
Asking honest questions must be allowed and encouraged.
What do doctors really know or not know about ECT?
Why do some people feel helped?
What research has been done and by whom? Is there a conflict of interest? How are these studies conducted? How do doctors define depression and improvement?
Why is only one state keeping track of ECT induced deaths? Shouldn’t all doctors want complete and accurate risk data so their patients can make a truly informed choice?
Why aren’t patients given full informed consent?
Why don’t doctors take patients who claim injury, seriously?
Why don’t they offer before and after testing?
Why haven’t shock machines been tested by the FDA, after the decades ECT has been used? Or when the FDA was recommended to do so in 2011?
If the animal studies conducted in the 50’s and 60’s were so inadequate, why were they never repeated?
Why does some in medical practice who speaks critically of ECT get black-balled?
What role has the media played in promoting ECT? Have they shown journalistic integrity in the process?
How legitimate are the diagnosis labels used to justify ECT?
Why is honest ECT questioning always shut down?
Why does my story count for so little, when it would surely be treated as credible and praised if it were positive?
I could go on and on.
People don’t ask these questions when the discussion is dominated by Suzie Success Stories. Who wants to be the a*&hole that questions a “treatment” that “saved someones life?”
Questions like these are often viewed as offensive.
But why? Shouldn’t we want to know the answers for ALL patients?
Shouldn’t the Suzie’s out there want to know the truth too? That maybe there’s more to their depression and it’s treatment than they were originally told? Maybe, like me, their “treatment resistant depression” is actually treatable?
(2007). Retrieved from http://www.breggin.com/ECT/2007Neurop…
Retrieved March 12, 2016, from http://www.ectresources.org/ECTscienc…
Retrieved March 12, 2016, from http://www.ectresources.org/ECTscience/Hartelius_1952___Animals___Brain_damage__Definitive_.pdf
Andre, L. (1991, September). Electroshock as head injury. Retrieved February 14, 2016, from http://www.ect.org/effects/headinjury…
Andre, L. (2009). Doctors of deception: What they don’t want you to know about shock treatment. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Breggin, P. R. (2015, April 8). Simple Truth 10: Electroshock is Brain Trauma [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOtac…
Committee for the Truth is Psychiatry. (n.d.). Electroconvulsive Therapy Causes Permanent Amnesia And Cognitive Deficits, Prominent Researcher Admits « ect.org. Retrieved March 12, 2016, from http://www.ect.org/?p=699
Friedberg, J. (1976). Shock treatment is not good for your brain. San Francisco: Glide Publications.
Further increase in the use of ECT without consent in England | ECT statistics. (2016, January 30). Retrieved March 12, 2016, from https://ectstatistics.wordpress.com/2…
Read, J. (2016, February 19). The Curious Case of over 50 Consecutive ECTs in Melbourne – Mad In America. Retrieved March 12, 2016, from http://www.madinamerica.com/2016/02/t…
I read this and think, this could have happened to anyone of us when were were getting shocked.
It’s beyond disturbing to see how its viewed by the legal system and hospital. If I had died like this, it would just get brushed off as “extremely rare” circumstance so she, like other survivors who are injured or killed by shock don’t matter.
What we don’t hear is how the hospital “treated” her “mental illness,” everything they tried, because they’re doctors. And you sure as hell can’t hear Elsie’s side of the story, now that she’s dead.
At least Elsie Tindle’s death is getting media attention and someone is trying to do something about it via Electric shock therapy death: Sunderland coroner writes to Health Secretary in bid to prevent further fatalities – Sunderland Echo.
The latest status update on the FDA/shock machine issue, a petition to sign and how to circumvent FDA censorship.
Please read and sign the petition. Understand the the issues. Send docket comments, screen capture and save them.
Share FDA articles like this and hashtag with #FDAStoptheShockDevice
“We have 41 days to #FDAStopTheShockDevice — Please help us make this real. It is very important to understand that this petition will go to the FDA, but the FDA is only accepting original comment, not mass-mail campaigns. If you want individual comment submitted through MindFreedom, please post your comment in this section. We will routinely update comments to FDA website. Also, in the petition, there is the information for you to directly submit your comments to the FDA. Please sign this petition to show your support.”
Follow the link below to view, sign and share this petition:
Also make sure to respond to FDA page on the following two shock machine related issues:
Docket No. 2014-N–1210 for ‘‘Neurological Devices; Reclassification of Electroconvulsive Therapy Devices Intended for Use in Treating Severe Major Depressive Episode in Patients 18 Years of Age and Older Who Are Treatment-Resistant or Require a Rapid Response; Effective Date of Requirement for Premarket Approval for Electroconvulsive Therapy Devices for Certain Specified Intended Uses’’
and be sure to use the hashtag #FDAStopTheShockDevice with any FDA/shock machine reclassification related posts or sharing you do 🙂
“It really hollowed me out and it was impossible to feel any type of emotion and that lasted for quite a long time you couldn’t experience the feeling of loving your kids and when my brain injury kicks in that’s when I feel very dissociated–its like this curtain comes down you can’t relate to anybody or feel any emotion. You become very robotic.”
Or you can listen to the intview via YouTube.
There should be more interviews on Sue’s case coming soon.