George Ure is wrong, or
America is so great that...
half of us have to be drugged by Big Pharma to be able to stand to live here. No, don't take my word for it, note the following report from your government paid for by your tax slavery...(highlights are my additions)
- Over the last 10 years, the percentage of Americans who took at least one prescription drug in the past month increased from 44% to 48%. The use of two or more drugs increased from 25% to 31%. The use of five or more drugs increased from 6% to 11%.
- In 2007-2008, 1 out of every 5 children and 9 out of 10 older Americans reported using at least one prescription drug in the past month.
- Those who were without a regular place for health care, health insurance, or prescription drug benefit had less prescription drug use compared with those who had these benefits.
- The most commonly used types of drugs included: asthma medicines for children, central nervous system stimulants for adolescents, antidepressants for middle-aged adults, and cholesterol lowering drugs for older Americans.
Now some interesting bits to note are that this data is already nearly 5 years old, and further the NCHS also points out that rates of antidepressant use is up 400% in the last ten years (2008 data), and that this rate itself is escalating at nearly 56% per year. This would suggest that by sometime in 2019 (absent the end of the world, of course) nearly all of the US population will be consuming Big Pharma chemicals daily. We need to also note that ALL the currently marketed asthma prescription medicines contain some 'neuro affective' component. This is to say that the chemicals used to affect the airways of asthma affected individuals contain mood, or mind altering drugs (that is how many of them work, by 'tricking' the body's various systems from central control in the brain).
Further, the 'path' being taught in psychiatric education centers is toward a 'phased' approach to mental state management over the lifetime of the victim (oops, patient). The desire now is to fade from early mind altering stimulant use in pre-adolescents to more complex central nervous system 'agents' in the teens, and twenties, and then shove you right into heavy anti-depressants (and other 'mental illness' chemicals) in your thirties.
If one digs a bit deeper into dot gov docs, it is possible to find that one in seven US workers is now considered 'fit' by the definition established in 1947. Further, when applied to the general population, this figure drops to one in 29. Additionally, it is the conclusion of the government survey that legal prescription drug use in the workplace costs the US, nationally, at least a full percentage point on (their) productivity model. And the trend looks as if it will continue unabated resulting in some 2 percent impact on productivity (projected from 2007) by the end of 2012.
While 2 percent does not sound like much, bear in mind that half of the US work force is under-employed to some degree, and MOST of the others are dependent on government for employment. So we need every ounce of 'productivity' we can get, even the mythical kind measured by governments.
As one investigates further, it may be noted that of those persons taking anti-depressants for over 10 years, MOST (nearly 90 percent) are taking multiple chemicals. Further, it is now fair to state that in less than 2 generations, or since their 'discovery' in Switzerland in the 1950's, more than half the American population is now under the 'influence' of anti-depressants. While not half of our population are taking these drugs, those who are (estimated to be 23% legally and 9% illegal) now are affecting over half the population through work, or family associations. The whole 'codependency' rap...but this time, i think even the 'co-incidence theorists' will have a hard time saying it was merely corporate greed, and not some sinister design to affect the populace as a whole. From zero percent, to half the populace in 40 years.....hmmmm?
This idea of 'stupefying the populace' with 'legal chemicals' has to be considered in that the totality of legal prescription drug use is NOT limited to anti-depressants, and if one (or the gov't) takes into consideration bi-polar, anti-psychotic, anti-anxiety, social-mood altering, and other categories of recent Big Pharma output, then on any given day, over half of all the populace is using some form of licensed, legal, mind altering (and maybe addictive in some form) drugs. Even the 'respected' US department of Labor, well known for its multiple, and intricate lies via statistics, is using 'work force threatened' language in many of its reports. Further, there are rumors from military recruiters that 'home schooled', and 'no psych meds (in the family!)' applicants are to be given preferential treatment as they are herded into certain operational classifications.
Further, the chemistry of these drugs is not so simple as to have their effects confined to the liver. These drugs have profound effects during the absorption phase as they are neuro-reactive substances that cross the neuron-to-blood barrier within the 'second brain' that surrounds the intestines. They are triggers to brain chemical activity through the vagus nerve that interconnects your brain-in-the-skull with the brain-in-the-gut. While it is true the liver is a reductionist organ, and does not metabolise (mostly) more complex chemicals from simpler ones, this is definitively not true of either of your brains, these guys make all kinds of interesting complex chemicals from base compounds. The effect of the SSRI drug construction being soooo close to PCP is to virtually 'insist' that the body combine these chemicals (which it does as part of the process of delivery of the chemical to the liver). The issue can be debated ad infinitum at the detail levels, citing various sources in toxicology, however, at a larger view level, it is curious that :
Answer: PCP, developed in the 1950s as an intravenous surgical anesthetic, is classified as a dissociative anesthetic: Its sedative and anesthetic effects are trance-like, and patients experience a feeling of being "out of body" and detached from their environment.
PCP was used in veterinary medicine but was never approved for human use because of problems that arose during clinical studies, including delirium and extreme agitation experienced by patients emerging from anesthesia.
and the effects of SSRI (anti-depressant) drugs?
Side effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors
All SSRIs work in a similar way and generally cause similar side effects. However, each SSRI has a different chemical makeup, so one may affect you a little differently from another.
Side effects of SSRIs can include:
- Dry mouth
- Nervousness, agitation or restlessness
- Reduced sexual desire or difficulty reaching orgasm
- Inability to maintain an erection (erectile dysfunction)
- Increased sweating
- Weight gain
- Feelings of isolation, extreme detachment
You may experience less nausea with extended- and controlled-release forms of SSRIs. As with most antidepressants, sexual side effects are common with SSRIs. They occur in over half the people who take them.
Now, note that from these two examples alone we have correspondence within the language sets. As a linguist, one of the clues i first examine. By going into details on both PCP, and any given SSRI chemical, or ALL of the compounds, the degree to which the same symptoms are reported from both PCP use and SSRI use approaches 98 %.
If one examines the phenomenon of the SSRI drugs, their history in the 1950s in Switzerland, and the path way to their discovery, it is possible to formulate some very interesting questions, if not conclusions. Such as, why do almost identical chemicals appear in the Soviet Military Criminal Psychiatric system in the 1940s where they were used in an effort at 'chemical population control'? Why do so many of the 'doctors' who worked on, or in support of early western Big Pharma anti-depressant (rational medicines movement) development have ties to the Soviet psychiatric establishment?
Of course, i am basically an idiot fumbling around seeking meaning in universe and thus have mostly not a clue as to the 'why' of things, so i cannot answer why our government (USofA) is actively supporting any and all paths to doping up the populace. Nor can i answer why so many of the systems seem to be inter-supporting in a near symbiotic way...case in point D.Rumsfeld rams the 'aspartame' conconction (an ant poison) through the FDA as an 'artificial sweetener' merely one year before the first big increase in reported depressive states in the populace that led directly to nearly half of us now taking drugs merely to stand to live in this great free country. Hmmm...aspartame....neurotoxin? depressant? mind-fucker? introduced with bribes and threats into the food chain, then the same corpo's bring out anti-depressants? Hmmm...sounds suspiciously like that 'problem-reaction-solution' thing that David Icke is found of pointing out....
and for those not drinking the 'energy drinks', and the older mercury containing, high fructose syrup mind-and-body-destroyers, there is always the new, mass spraying for 'mosquitoes', or even, perhaps, chemtrails....i know they sure depress the hell out of me.
And, in conclusion, i would like to point out that George Ure is a 'self admitted' liberal when it comes to big pharma and their chemicals, but as a statistician, even he should have to admit that, when the population growth is eliminated from the equation, it is really curious that suicide rates are up in near lock step with 'anti-depressant' use. Target a populace, say the US military 'grunts' (though they don't do so much of that any more), and then have a look at the rates of anti-depressant use (up 400% in military employed hispanics under MST SGT grade over 2002 to 2009), and then suicide levels, and don't leave out murders associated with suicides as they are symptomatic of some of these mental 'mood controllers', and what do you have, why only a 600 % increase in suicide rates over the same period. Hmmm...maybe i am starting to become a 'co-incidence theorist'?
But, in the end, George Ure is wrong to state that these chemicals are beneficial either at individual levels, or at the level as a larger social phenomenon. And to the claims for 'active' depression, meaning a 'disease state' relating to serotonin creation, or uptake, the percentage of the populace diagnosed with this state PRIOR to the invention of the tricyclic form of anti-depressants in the early 1950's was less than 1%. So why are half of us taking them?
Oh, yeah, that's right, it's cause America is such a freaking great country to live in...sorry, i forgot to shield my eyes and actually saw some political convention propaganda. Tainted my whole day.
Apologies to George for my spleen, but he is wrong to support this paradigm in my opinion.
Oh, and one last item to note, IF you are on SSRI's or other mind chemical altering drugs, be very careful of what you eat and drink. Both the new Starbucks green coffee drinks, and many of the energy drinks contain ginseng, which will drive you into a maniacal state if you get a sufficiency. Not a good thing.
Oh, and further, there are statistical links to villi destroying disease conditions and the drinking of both 'energy drinks', and 'counter/fountain sodas' containing high fructose corn syrup (it's the mercury found there). The villi are tiny little 'hairs' that your gut uses to move foods through for processing. Kind of like the cilli in the lungs that perform similar movement functions. In any case, if your villi are killed off, your gut will fail you, likely requiring even more expensive 'medicines' to maintain you during the rest of your short, miserable cause you can't absorb drugs any more, life.
September 5, 2012
Copyright...all rights reserved, no copying without attribution.