Psychiatrists gone wild: ‘psychosis risk syndrome’

This text will be replaced

Broadcast of July 21, 2010. Part 1 of 1 » Download mp3: click here

22 July 2010 | Permalink | comments: 12

Share |

Categories: [ Apollo Moon Missions, Big Pharma, Mass Medication, Mental Illness, Psychosis Risk Syndrome ]

Tonight's show features two excellent interviews.

In the first half I am joined by Kim Cullen from the Citizens Committee on Human Rights to discuss the implications of 'Australian of the Year', Patrick McGorry's plan for pre-drugging children with powerful psychotropic medication as a preventive treatment against mental illness.

Our discussion centers on a recent article authored by Jan Eastgate which gives insight into the impact of these policies in Australia.

As indicated in the following article from Psychology Today, this new medical label could lead to a staggering 90% misdiagnosis rate:

Even in the most expert of hands (ie in very highly selected research clinics), at least two of three people who get the diagnosis do not go on to become psychotic. Of great counterintuitive interest, the longer the research clinic operates the lower becomes its rate of correct identification. With time and spreading reputation, the clinic attracts increasingly heterogeneous referrals- so that it is more difficult to discriminate from among them those who are truly at risk for psychosis.

What would be the misidentification rate once the diagnosis became official and was applied in the real world? No one can say for sure, but two thirds is certainly a lower limit of misidentification. There are several reasons to believe that the ratio of wrong diagnoses would actually be much higher: 1)the raters in general practice would be much less expert than specialists in research clinics; 2) the "patients" would be closer to normal and harder to discriminate; and, 3)drug company marketing would influence parents and clinicians to be especially alert to any strangeness in teenagers. It has been estimated that the false positive rate would jump from about 70 percent in specialty clinics to about 90 percent in general practice. This means that as many as an astounding nine in ten individuals identified as "risk syndrome" would not really be at risk for developing psychosis.
- Psychology Today | 18 March 2010

In the second half of the show I am joined by Apollo sceptic and film maker Jarrah White.

Jarrah has made numerous short documentaries which are all posted on youtube. Jarrah claims that the Apollo Moon missions were faked, and he has compiled an impressive amount of evidence to this effect.

I leave final judgment on this topic to the discretion of our listeners!

Tonight's show was highly enjoyable and I'm sure you'll find it worthwhile listening.

Related Links:

The Brave New World of Pre-Drugging Kids: Patrick McGorry & Psychosis Risk Syndrome

Airport body scanners reveal all, but what about when it's your kid?

Prof. Niels Harritt a hit in Sydney - standing room only

Facebook Deletes Official Alex Jones Page Over Gadsden Flag

Obama Deception censorship draws major response

'HIV overrated, African deaths caused by poverty'

Jarrah White - Moonfaker series

Comments

whether Jarrah’s investigations turn out to prove the ‘landing’ did or didn’t happen is irrelevant compared to the fact that he is actually being a true investigative journalist in the hunt for the truth! Thank God for people like him! Do we ever see a true investigative journalist in our local mainstream media - NFWay! Another reason to make it imperative to keep the NET free!!!

By angry dave on 2010 07 22 - 19:19:51

Although drugging kids haphazardly is wrong. I have to alert that the group that this Jim Cullen advocates may be a Scientology front. Google it yourself and see.

By blackregiment on 2010 07 25 - 23:45:21

Great podcast Kim. Get the truth out and keep the bastards honest.

By Torch8008 on 2010 07 27 - 14:08:51

Good work Truth News Radio. Great information Kim. None of the drugs that are being prescribed to people under 18 years for depression or psychosis are approved by the TGA for use on children. Where is the duty of care from the psychiatrists? When will they be held accountable for the damage they are causing?

By Roger on 2010 07 27 - 14:43:56

How can this man (Patrick Mcgorry) be given the “Australian of the Year” award??!!

By Magda on 2010 07 28 - 10:53:12

Magda, the same way Obama can be given the Nobel Peace prize for escalating war and destroying the rights of citizens.

By Fred on 2010 08 02 - 18:33:40

You’re playing right into the “conspiracy nut” stereotype by showing interest in the moon landing conspiracy theory. I should RTFA as they say on Slashdot, but to me it seems like there is a lot more evidence that the moon landings did actually take place than that they didn’t. This is the sort of thing that makes me wonder whether you do find conspiracy theories attractive Hereward, rather than cold hard facts (which can often point to a conspiracy).

By Mark on 2010 08 05 - 19:44:11

blackregiment, Who cares whether it is a Scientology front or not? They are letting us know about some thing which is very important!

By Magda on 2010 10 19 - 08:38:35

This really solved my problem, thank you!

By profitable trading signals on 2010 12 17 - 06:02:15

I just wanted to make a quick comment to say I’m glad I found your blog. Thanks

By web design and promotion on 2010 12 17 - 22:39:05

Awesome post and must say it got my attention. I was browsing online and saw your site and am glad i found it.

By Veneers on 2010 12 19 - 20:41:29

generisk viagra jgf Cialis online kaufen %-OOO tilaa viagra pbxxk cialis %( genirico cialis online uzu

By sexiholli on 2011 03 08 - 11:22:54

In order to leave a comment you may need to register and sign in.

Recent Comments

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/dane-wigington-on-infowars-4-4-13/#comment-33658

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:31:03
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:28:20
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

http://www.soldierhugs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Geoengineering.pdf

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:19:23
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard Clampett,

the video you linked is a really old conglomerate of all sorts of claims that have been debunked ad nauseam.

What do you think is the ultimate proof for the existence of chemtrails?

Why should we have to assume there is such a thing like chemtrails? How are they different from contrails?

By Josh on 2013 04 10 - 06:59:34
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

http://realnewsworldwide.com/2008/09/10/chemtrails-ultimate-proof/

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 09 - 16:31:36
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

If you open the link you will see the reference to chemtrail area forecasts. The other link I wish to post is refused by the “Truth news” which claims it may be SPAM and “will be moderated”, probably because it mentions chemtrails in the link. However, I will try again by separating the words. http://www.chemtrail forecast.com/main.html

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 13 - 09:02:16
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

about the link you posted - where is the relevance in the discussion about persistent contrails?

By Josh on 2013 03 13 - 08:50:08
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

http://www.haarpstatus.com/status.html

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 13 - 08:44:15
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

after you consistently refused to accept the fact that fuel combustion generates more water than the equivalent of fuel burnt - even when a Qantas pilot confirmed this - I am highly skeptical of your “aviation life experience”. I hope you understand that.

So there are more explanations needed before your claims can be taken seriously.

1. How did you determine that the ambient conditions at the upper troposphere were not conducive to the formation of contrails this summer?

2. How did you determine the causal connection between trails and lack of rain?

3. How did you determine the altitude of the low trail that you saw? How can you be sure it was below the cumulus? Why not above (remember: 3D viewing up to 160m max)? Any pictures maybe?

If you want to do REAL research on the Internet, I strongly suggest to repeat every search query that you issue with the word “debunked” appended. That is the way to do proper research because you see both sides and their arguments. Don’t just fall for sensational claims.

Unfortunately, the Internet is loaded with bunk.

By Josh on 2013 03 02 - 18:06:10
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Josh Anonymous,

You apparently do not do much research. Notice how, over the Eastern Australian summer, there have been many chemtrails coincident with usual weather patterns where obvious rain should have been the outcome had the chemtrails not been laid, and it was not, and this during the season when ambient conditions are not conducive to the formation of contrails. Chemtrails are entirely different to what you term “persistent contrails” as you would know if you had sufficient aviation life experience. You may try to explain how there was recently, and I have observed the same many times before, a chemtrail below a layer of fair weather Cu at 8,000 ft and how this could possibly occur without the laws of physics and thermodynamics being turned on their head. I suggest that you do an Internet search for the activities of Bill Gates and geoengineering.

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 02 - 13:51:00
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.