Re: FW: Bush Using Drugs to Control Depression,Erratic Behavior

the more important story would seem to be the one you posted about that i do
find quite a bit of news about, the New Freedom
Commission on Mental Health (they just gotta get that word 'freedom' in
there). and yeah the bushies planning mental health is almost guaranteed to
be sick.

your post with the subject "RE: RHIZOME_RAW: FW: Bush to screen population
for mental illness" names names and presents facts that can be checked and
verified or debunked, whereas the other story is unverifiable, sloppy, and
just doesn't seem like credible journalism.

the interesting story you post says

"the Texas project sparked controversy when a Pennsylvania government
employee revealed state officials with influence over the plan had received
money and perks from drug companies who stand to gain from it.

Allen Jones, an employee of the Pennsylvania Office of the Inspector General
says in his whistleblower report the "political/pharmaceutical alliance"
that developed the Texas project, which promotes the use of newer, more
expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs, was behind the
recommendations of the New Freedom Commission, which were "poised to
consolidate the TMAP effort into a comprehensive national policy to treat
mental illness with expensive, patented medications of questionable benefit
and deadly side effects, and to force private insurers to pick up more of
the tab."

Jones points out, according to the British Medical Journal, companies that
helped start the Texas project are major contributors to Bush's election
funds. Also, some members of the New Freedom Commission have served on
advisory boards for these same companies, while others have direct ties to
TMAP.

Eli Lilly, manufacturer of olanzapine, one of the drugs recommended in the
plan, has multiple ties to the Bush administration, BMJ says. The elder
President Bush was a member of Lilly's board of directors and President Bush
appointed Lilly's chief executive officer, Sidney Taurel, to the Homeland
Security Council.

Of Lilly's $1.6 million in political contributions in 2000, 82 percent went
to Bush and the Republican Party.

Another critic, Robert Whitaker, journalist and author of "Mad in America,"
told the British Medical Journal that while increased screening "may seem
defensible," it could also be seen as "fishing for customers.""

I have read about the bushies having given out about 100 million dollars in
government services contracts to christian organizations. not only does this
sort of thing undermine the separation of church and state that your country
has an enviable tradition in (and it has nurtured both religion in the usa
and the state) but the bushies are partisan in giving this sort of money,
apparently, almost exclusively to christian organizations, not other
religious groups.

so for them to be planning 'mental health' in such a way as to make their
friends richer seems perfectly in keeping with their past actions.

ja