Pharmaceutical companies and other corporations are pursuing their own best interests to the detriment of the children to whom their products are aimed. This is the theme of Joel Bakan's new book, "Childhood Under Siege: How Big Business Targets Children." Bakan is a professor of law at the University of British Columbia and the author of a previous best seller, "The Corporation."
Marilyn Wedge: What inspired you to write "Childhood Under Siege?"
Joel Bakan: A number of things conspired. In my earlier work, a book and film called "The Corporation," I looked at issues around children and childhood and when I was on the road with that project I found that these were the issues people were really passionately concerned about, worried about. So that got me thinking about doing a fuller treatment of the issues. Around the same time, my two kids were entering the tween years and I was noticing how much they were consuming and thinking about commercial media -- not just television anymore, but games, virtual worlds and, a bit later, social networks. I felt like I was really losing touch with them, that there was a third force between me and them. That third force was big business, and it wasn't at all benevolent. Finally, I have always thought that how we treat children as a society is a window into what kind of society we are. As Nelson Mandela has said, there is no keener revelation of the soul of a society than the way it treats its children.
MW: How do pharmaceutical companies influence the creation of childhood psychiatric diagnoses?
JB: "The Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel of Mental Disorders (DSM)" is the bible of psychiatric disorders. Indeed, the lead authors of the last two editions have joined forces to publicly warn that the broadening of diagnostic categories ill-serves patients and is a bonanza for the pharmaceutical industry. For pharmaceutical companies, more and wider diagnoses of mental disorders mean larger markets for their products. That cannot be denied. Nor can it be denied that the companies influence not only the "DSM" process, but other less formal channels through which diagnoses are formed, such as medical research, the medical literature, and continuing education for doctors.
Child psychiatrist Dr. Joseph Biederman, for example, was highly influential among child psychiatrists and pediatricians -- "if he breathed a drug at a conference, thousands of kids would be on it," according to physician Dr. Lawrence Diller. The same was true for diagnoses, in particular the diagnosis of pediatric bipolar disorder the he almost single-handedly created. The fact that his work was supported by several drug companies, and that he was paid handsomely for giving speeches and consultations on their behalf, does not necessarily deny the validity of his work. But it does raise serious questions.
MW: How is medical research corrupted by Big Pharma?
JB: There are really two points where pharmaceutical companies exert influence over medical research -- the research itself, and then the publication of that research. At both points that influence can create a tilt towards over prescribing drugs. In terms of the conduct of research, for a variety of reasons, including changes to the laws regulating research, medical research is more under the direct control and sponsorship of pharmaceutical companies than ever before. With that power, they are able to define research questions, choose methodologies, and do analyses, all of which gives them the ability to increase the likelihood of certain results.
As Marcia Angell, Harvard professor and former editor-in-chief of "The New England Journal of Medicine," described it in a clinical trial "you can control what data you look at, control the analysis, and then shade your interpretation of the results. You can design studies to come out the way you want them to." This can help yield "science" that emphasizes the efficacy of drugs and downplays the drugs' negative side-effects. But if a study does come out negative, a company can simply refrain from publishing it and it never reaches the public.
MW: In your chapter "Prescriptions for Profit," you discuss how profitable diagnoses are invented by psychiatrists. What was the role of Harvard Medical School professor Joseph Biederman in creating the diagnosis of childhood bipolar disorder?
JB: As I understand it, Dr. Biederman began to notice in the 1990s that some kids who had been diagnosed with ADHD were not responding to treatment with stimulants, the usual approach to treating that disorder. He attributed this to the fact they actually had bipolar disorder. This was a radical idea at the time. Bipolar disorder was believed to be a disorder that only afflicted adults, and perhaps teens in rare cases. While some kids were afflicted with depression, the telltale symptom of mania did not show up in kids. What Biederman declared, however, was that in kids agitation and distraction were substitutes for mania in adults, and therefore it made sense to diagnose kids with bipolar disorder. That is a fairly stripped down explanation, but I believe it is essentially accurate.
MW: In the book you show how video game companies and Internet sites manipulate children to become addicted to their products. With social media sites, the marketing directed at children is even more dangerous because it is ever-present and invisible. What hope do you see for sheltering children from predatory marketing practices of corporations? Is it up to parents to protect their kids, or do parents need help from government and public policy?
JB: In the book I argue that the problem has become way too large for parents to deal with on their own. It's no longer just a TV set in the living room, but an array of interactive, social and mobile platforms. There is a context in which we as parents and we as a society have to create a healthier context in which we raise our children, especially in terms of extreme media violence, sexuality, and junk food marketing. But we also have to be wary of trampling free speech values. What I have suggested is a hybrid of self-regulation and traditional legal regulation. This co-regulation may be a viable solution for regulating some elements of kid marketing and media. This approach -- which Michelle Obama's obesity task force essentially adopted, and which is also used in some European countries to regulate media, is likely to be effective and to meet the requirements of First Amendment law.
Follow Marilyn Wedge, Ph.D. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/marilynWedge
Prior to medication, he complained of having two brains and the bad side taking over the good side and making him do bad stuff. He has lived the past 3.5 years with depression, social anxieties, rapid mood swings where his moods switched ever few seconds ending with him slamming his head into the ground begging for his moods to stop switching. He has violent rages that take him over, causing him to destroy property and abuse his family and has excessive energy bringing him to tears because he can't control himself. He hears voices and sees monsters for episodes lasting up to 30 minutes. On more than one occasion he’s wanted to kill himself, we even had to take a knife out of his hand when he wanted to stab himself in the stomach. (continued in next post)
Our son does not have ADHD. Our son is not neglected or unloved. The doctors did not push us to put our child on medication. We have met with multiple doctors, psychiatrists and therapists before making any decision to medicate. Our son is a child with a mental illness who is deeply loved by his family. After dragging him out of the street when he wanted to be hit by a car, he begged us to take him to the doctor so he could get some medicine because his brain was not working right.
Our son is medicated because his brain is sick, we can care less about doctors making money or the Big Pharm making their millions. We’re grateful that our child has medical care available that can improve his life, without it, he may have committed suicide before he even reached his teen years. I know that we’re excellent parents who give our son love, discipline and quality time, but love is not enough for mental illness. Until you’ve walked in our shoes, please withhold judgement.
I would like to ask the question, would you also judge a parent for allowing their child to go through chemo, knowing that millions are made in profit? What about diabetes? Why is my child's illness any different?
His speech teacher was overworked (her grad student had just been recalled to school, so the teacher had even more work to do).
She was frequently impatient and flustered.
After a rough session when he was eight, she tried to tell me he had ADHD and I should get him diagnosed so he could start meds.
Concerned, I asked his teacher, and she laughed. She said she wished all her boys had my son's ability to focus. Then she asked if any other teachers had ever mentioned the issue to me, which they had not.
Sometimes the perspective and motivation goes unchecked. The immediate gratification (sit still and make this easy for me!) is what the teachers are advocating.
Gardasil is a separate issue. It has to do with sexual habits, which I know terrifies most parents to hear. Those 12-years or older children are already the ones making the decision to have sex, making the decisions whether or not to use protection. Shouldn't they also be making the decisions on how to protect themselves with their sexual activity? After all, they're the ones who will suffer the consequences...genital warts, sterility, cancer. I'm a parent. I'd love to stay in my dream state of sugar & spice. But my sons are going to be having sex...and it's possible they won't be comfortable telling me about it until afterwards. At that point, vaccination is too late. So, if they know they're going to be sexually active, and decide on their own to protect themselves from genital warts and potentially protect women they care about from the same as well as cancer, then I think they should be allowed to do so.
the question is the safety of the vaccine and the ethics of medical intervention.
Like other posters, I do believe that we all have choices about what we ALLOW children and teens to be influenced by. Teaching them to be more aware of how they can be manipulated is also important.
Over-diagnosed, under-diagnosed, both; let people argue, but ADHD is a real disorder and not simply the result video games or parental over-indulgence. It would be a heck of a lot simpler if that were the case.
Most medical doctors (and psychiatrists are among them) do not offer a diagnosis or prescribe medicine without examining their patients, especially now that there is fear of malpractice. Could you provide some evidence from an unbiased source that shows this is happening?
Also, see our "Nat'l Alliance of Integrative Health Services" where we truly welcome home our Warriors, Vets and their Families with health services, not more labels and drugs that promote disillusionment and despair. Community MH isn't much better as they are not prepared to serve our Vets with health practices, but, rather, more drugs and conventional treatment. http://jerryvestinjuredwarrior.com
Hope this helps you learn that we are facing an epidemic of isolation, suicides and drugging of our vets rather than health practices. Our communities are not prepared to engage our returning warriors.