Jon Jureidini

You are currently browsing articles tagged Jon Jureidini.

 

 

“Personalities, rhetoric and charisma are driving the direction of mental health rather than science and evidence.” (Martin Whitely MLA, Parliament of Western Australia, 25 September 2012)

Related Media

Sue Dunlevy, News Limited Sunday papers, 7 October 2012, Doubts cast on youth mental health program. Available at  http://www.news.com.au/national/doubts-cast-on-youth-mental-health-program/story-fndo4eg9-1226489760605

Also see Patrick McGorry’s ‘Ultra High Risk of Psychosis’ training DVD fails the common sense test http://speedupsitstill.com/patrick-mcgorrys-ultra-high-risk-psychosis-theory-fails-common-sense-test

MARTIN WHITELY (Trancript of speech in the Legislative Assembly, Parliament of Western Australia, 25 September 2012): I want to use this opportunity to talk about some very serious concerns I have about the direction of the mental health policy in Australia. My basic contention is that personalities, rhetoric and charisma are driving the direction of mental health rather than science and evidence.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Part One – Is Nick Sick?   (11 minutes)

Part Two – Is Nick Sick?   (9 minutes)

Response to the ‘Is Nick Sick?’ video blog

by Professor Jon Jureidini

“Patrick McGorry’s Orygen Youth Health, CAARMS training video[1] on how to diagnose ‘Attenuated Psychosis’ demonstrates how not to carry out a psychiatric interview and interact with young people.”

As identified by Martin Whitely in his commentary about the CAARMS training DVD, describing Nick as being at ultra-high risk of psychosis (UHR) fails the common-sense test. Even more concerning is that Nick is labelled as having Attenuated Psychosis – in ordinary language, he is already mildly mad.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Today (Wednesday 13 July 2011) Mental Health Minister Mark Butler announced the membership of the committee responsible for developing new Australian guidelines on ADHD. Of the ten members invited to participate, two have significant conflicts of interest that should preclude their involvement. However, this compares very favorably to previous ADHD guideline development processes which have been dominated by pharmaceutical company allies who have relied on commercially compromised research.

It is also, for the first time, an open process. We know from the start who is developing the guidelines and the details of their conflict of interest declaration. (see http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/guidelines/adhd-conflicts-interest ) Gillard Government Mental Health Minister Mark Butler deserves credit for this. Let us hope this creates a precedent for future commonwealth government medical guidelines and advisory committee processes.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Australia’s first forum of psychiatrists, psychologists, educators, academics, researchers, politicians and other professions concerned about the large and growing number of children diagnosed with ‘ADHD’ and treated with drugs is being convened in Brisbane (7-8 February) by the Youth Affairs Network of Queensland (YANQ).

Opinions as to the validity of ‘ADHD’ as a psychiatric disorder vary among the invited participants. Some consider that ‘ADHD’ is a real but rare condition that is mis-diagnosed and over-medicated; others consider ‘ADHD’ a fraud.

However, all participants agree that unnecessarily administering powerful psychotropic drugs to children is a violation of their rights and often results in serious short and long term harm.

Participants are also concerned that:

  1. The criteria used to diagnose ‘ADHD’ are all subjectively assessed behaviours and these behaviours, losing things, forgetting, fidgeting, butting in, disliking homework, and playing loudly etc are a ‘normal’ part of childhood.
  2. There is nothing ‘ADHD specific’ about the effects of drugs used to treat the ‘disorder’. Although responses vary, most people become temporarily more narrowly focussed and compliant on low dose amphetamines.
  3. Drugs do nothing in the long term to address the many and varied causes of ‘ADHD’ type behaviours’.
  4. On occasions drugs mask the symptoms of serious conditions (such as abuse or trauma).
  5. ‘ADHD’ drugs have well established significant short term risks including cardiovascular and psychiatric problems.
  6. ‘ADHD’ stimulants are amphetamines or amphetamine like drugs that are frequently diverted for illicit use.
  7. We know little about the long-term effects of ADHD drugs on growing brains. The limited data that exists indicates their long term use provides no long term benefit but may pose significant risks.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , ,