Interesting article re the Omaha shooting: blame antidrepressants

Status
Not open for further replies.

TargetTerror

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
469
Location
Stalingrad, MA
Interesting article. Granted, the general tone of "blame these drugs - without the drugs there will be no shootings!" is the same, flawed argument the antis use for guns themselves. But, the general idea that these drugs can make teens violent is interesting.

America seems shocked that, yet again, a young male would pick up an assault rifle and murder his fellow citizens, then take his own life. This is what happened last night in Omaha, Nebraska, where the 19-year-old Hawkins killed himself and eight other people with an assault rifle. Those lacking keen observation skills are quick to blame guns for this tragedy, but others who are familiar with the history of such violent acts by young males instantly recognize a more sinister connection: A history of treatment with psychiatric drugs for depression and ADHD.

It all started in Columbine, Colorado, when Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold massacred their way into the history books on April 20, 1999 by killing 12 and wounding 23 people. The mainstream media virtually glorified the event, yet utterly failed to report the connection between violence in young men and treatment with psychiatric drugs. (Both Harris and Klebold were taking antidepressant drugs.)

It's a little known fact that antidepressant drugs have never been tested on children nor approved by the FDA for use on children. It is well established in the scientific literature, however, that such drugs cause young men to think violent thoughts and commit violent acts. This is precisely why the U.K. has outright banned the prescribing of such drugs to children. Yet here in the United States -- the capitol of gun violence by kids on depression drugs -- the FDA and drug companies pretend that mind-altering drugs have no link whatsoever to behavior.

Enormous evidence linking mind-altering drugs with violent acts
In 2005, I reported on this site that Eli Lilly had full knowledge of a 1200% increase in suicide risk for takers of their Prozac drug, a popular anti-depressant SSRI medication. (See http://www.newstarget.com/003086.html )

In 2006, we reported the results of a study published in the Archives of General Psychiatry showing that teens taking antidepressant drugs are more likely to commit suicide (and to be "successful" at completing the act). See http://www.newstarget.com/020643.html

On September 11, 2006, I reported on the link between antidepressant drugs and violent behavior yet again. (See http://www.newstarget.com/020394.html ) In that article, I explained, "If you're going to alter the brain chemistry of these children, you had better be prepared for the results. The result we're seeing now is mass killings. Elsewhere around the world, where children aren't doped up on all these drugs, we don't see this kind of behavior. This is what happens when you change children's brain chemistry; you get these results..."

The very next day, we published a report about the anti-depressant drug Paxil doubling the risk of violent behavior. (See http://www.newstarget.com/020406.html ) In that article, I stated, "This finding helps explain why school shootings are almost always conducted by children who are taking antidepressants. We also know that SSRIs cause children to disconnect from reality. When you combine that with a propensity for violence, you create a dangerous recipe for school shootings and other adolescent violence.

In April of this year, I also reported on the link between antidepressant drugs and the Virginia Tech shooting. See http://www.newstarget.com/021798.html

What I said in that article has urgent application right now, following the Omaha shooting:

A study published in the Public Library of Science Medicine (an open source medical journal) explored these same links in detail. (See Antidepressants and Violence: Problems at the Interface of Medicine and Law, by David Healy, Andrew Herxheimer, David B. Menkes)

The authors note that "Some regulators, such as the Canadian regulators, have also referred to risks of treatment-induced activation leading to both self-harm and harm to others" and the "United States labels for all antidepressants as of August 2004 note that 'anxiety, agitation, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility, aggressiveness, impulsivity, akathisia (psychomotor restlessness), hypomania, and mania have been reported in adult and pediatric patients being treated with antidepressants for major depressive disorder as well as for other indications, both psychiatric and nonpsychiatric'".

In other words, the link between antidepressants and violence has been known for years by the very people manufacturing, marketing or prescribing the drugs. As the author of the study mentioned above concluded, "The new issues highlighted by these cases need urgent examination jointly by jurists and psychiatrists in all countries where antidepressants are widely used."

That was last year, well before this latest shooting. The warning signs were there, and they've been visible for a long time. Medical authorities can hardly say they are "shocked" by this violent behavior. After all, the same pattern of violence among antidepressant takers has been observed, documented and published in numerous previous cases.


(Click the cartoon for the full-sized version.)
Not surprised at what happened in Omaha
The people of Omaha may be surprised at what happened there yesterday, but I'm not. Why? Because the shooter, Robert Hawkins, had a history of being "treated" for both depression and ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder). (Source: Associated Press)

And what is the standard American psychiatric "treatment" for these conditions? Mind-altering drugs, of course.

ADHD, for example, is treated with a drug that used to be an illegal street drug called "speed." It's an amphetamine, and recent research published in the August, 2007 issue of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry reveals that Ritalin and other ADHD drugs actually stunt the growth of children, causing their brains and bodies to be physically altered. (See http://www.newstarget.com/021944.html )

Depression, of course, is treated with SSRI drugs, none of which have ever been safety approved by the FDA for use on children or teens. In other words, the use of these drugs on teenagers is a grand, mind-altering medical experiment, and what we just witnessed in Omaha is one result of that experiment.

There will be more. I hate to be accurate about this grisly prediction, because I grieve for the families of those lost to pharmaceutically-induced violence, but the truth is that until we stop drugging our children with psychotropic drugs, the shootings are not going to stop.

Big Pharma is to blame for this one, not the manufacturer of the gun. That gun has a trigger, you see, and the trigger was pulled by a finger. The finger was connected via a series of nerves to a brain, and that brain was altered by psychotropic drugs. The brain wasn't functioning like a normal, healthy, well-nourished brain; it was functioning like a zoned out "zombie" brain permanently distorted by psychiatric drugs.

Sending a teenager out into the public doped up on mind-altering drugs that we KNOW are linked to violence -- and jacked up on junk foods (he worked at McDonald's) -- is a certain recipe for disaster. Big Pharma executives, drug reps and the irresponsible psychiatrists who dish these pills out to teenagers might as well have just walked right into the mall and set off a bomb themselves. These are the people ultimately responsible for the tragedy in Omaha. Hawkins may have pulled the trigger, but modern psychiatry drugged him with violence-inducing chemicals. The fact that such drugs promote violence isn't even disputed. It's printed right on the warning labels of those drugs!

And as sad as this tragedy is for all those affected by this medication-induced violence, the truly sad part is that America still hasn't learned this lesson. If you drug the children with chemicals that cause violence, you're going to see more shootings. It's as simple as that. And if you take away the guns, you'll see bombs, knives or machetes used in these attacks. When disturbed young boys are doped up on psychotropic drugs that promote violence -- and they're drugged by the hundreds of thousands -- it's like playing a national game of Russian roulette (with apologies to Russia). Sooner or later, another kid whose mind has been altered by Ritalin, Prozac or some other drug is going to walk into yet another school or mall and start killing people. This kind of behavior is a direct product of chemical-based psychiatric "treatment."

The criminals running modern psychiatry
In fact, I predict we'll see another such shooting in the next 30 days, if not sooner. And yet, even with the increasing frequency of these events, the unholy alliance between Big Pharma and the immensely evil psychiatric industry will continue. Yet more children will be put on mind-altering drugs that stunt their growth, alter their brain chemistry, and turn them into mind-numbed massacre drones who acquire dangerous weapons and open fire in public places.

The psychiatric industry, though, thinks that yet MORE children need "treatment" with drugs for ADHD and depression. In fact, an industry press release recently claimed that only one-third of those children "suffering" from ADHD are receiving appropriate "treatment" for the condition. Of course, those are just code words for "drugging the children with high-profit pharmaceuticals." When the psychiatric authorities say "treatment," what they mean is "more drugging."

Want to learn the horrifying, yet true, history of modern psychiatry? Check out www.CCHR.org - the Citizens' Commission on Human Rights. They have a documentary so downright shocking that I couldn't even finish watching the whole thing. It's called Psychiatry: An Industry of Death.

Psyched Out: How Psychiatry Sells Mental Illness and Pushes Pills That KillAlso be sure to check out the shocking book by Kelly Patricia O'Meara called Psyched Out: How Psychiatry Sells Mental Illness and Pushes Pills That Kill. This book explains exactly why kids like Robert Hawkins who have been treated with psychiatric drugs end up shooting innocents.

What could have healed Robert Hawkins and saved lives
So what's the solution to all this? Robert Hawkins could have been healed with a radical change in diet that supports healthy brain chemistry. His parents or caretakers should have stopped the junk food, ended the medication and put him on raw, living foods and daily superfood smoothies, fresh vegetable juices, raw nuts and seeds and other wholesome, non-processed foods. Nutrition is the single most powerful factor determining healthy moods and behavior, and virtually all young men who commit violent acts (including the vast majority of those imprisoned in the U.S. today) suffer from wild nutritional deficiencies.

Robert Hawkins could have been a healthy, stable and normal kid with the help of some real food, real nutrition and real love from a supporting family. Instead, he lived on junk food, worked at McDonald's and took medication pills as directed by his psychiatric doctor. The results speak for themselves: This recipe of processed food and mind-altering drugs created a monster, and yesterday in Omaha, that monster exploded in a rage of violence.

If we don't learn from all this and stop drugging our nation's children, then those innocents in Omaha will have died in vain. And I ask the question: How many more innocent Americans must pay the price for medication-induced violence?

Ask yourself one question: Why does the FDA continue to allow these dangerous drugs to be prescribed to children and teens when 1) They have never been tested on children or teens, and 2) Other countries have already banned the prescribing of these drugs to children and teens?

Story Notes: The Associated Press originally reported Hawkins' age as 20 years old, but corrected it to 19 years old following a correction by local police. Hawkins was not reported to have been taking medications at the precise time of the shooting, but his caretaker, Debora Maruca-Kovac, said that "he had been treated in the past for depression and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder." We do not know exactly which drugs Hawkins had been treated with in the past, and we hope the names of those drugs will surface in future reports on this tragedy.

NewsTarget deeply regrets the loss of life witnessed in this event, and we commit to doing our part to end these medication-induced crimes that continue to be perpetrated by Big Pharma and modern psychiatry. You have permission to forward or reprint this article, with appropriate credit and a link back to this URL.

###

About the author: Mike Adams is a natural health author and technology pioneer with a passion for sharing empowering information to help improve personal and planetary health He has authored and published thousands of articles, interviews, consumers guides, and books on topics like health and the environment, reaching millions of readers with information that is saving lives and improving personal health around the world. Adams is an honest, independent journalist and accepts no money or commissions on the third-party products he writes about or the companies he promotes. In 2007, Adams launched EcoLEDs, a manufacturer of mercury-free, energy-efficient LED lighting products that save electricity and help prevent global warming. He also launched an online retailer of environmentally-friendly products (BetterLifeGoods.com) and uses a portion of its profits to help fund non-profit endeavors. He's also a successful software entrepreneur, having founded a well known email marketing software company whose technology currently powers the NewsTarget email newsletters. Adams volunteers his time to serve as the executive director of the Consumer Wellness Center, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, and regularly pursues cycling, nature photography, Capoeira and Pilates. He's also author of numerous health books published by Truth Publishing and is the creator of several consumer-oriented grassroots campaigns, including the Spam. Don't Buy It! campaign, and the free downloadable Honest Food Guide. He also created the free reference sites HerbReference.com and HealingFoodReference.com. Adams believes in free speech, free access to nutritional supplements and the ending of corporate control over medicines, genes and seeds. Known by his callsign, the 'Health Ranger,' Adams posts his missions statements, health statistics and health photos at www.HealthRanger.org
 
Blame anything except the person doing the evil acts.

There always has to be a "reason" other than "sometimes people are bad people".
 
Maybe depression is evolution's way of keeping people like this from having the wherewithal to kill others.

Take away the depression, and all you have is the evil.
 
I agree that psychotropic drugs can cause a lot of odd things, but I ain't yet seen a drug that can pull a trigger.

I agree with TR. I've been depressed. I've been angry. I've been in all kinds of bad moods. Life's a real bitch sometimes.

You don't murder people. You just don't. That's it, move on.

No excuses. There have got to be some hard and fast rules, and that one is right up there. Pretty easy rule to follow actually. Cut and dried. Simple.
 
Basically what some of you are saying is that mental illness does not exist. As someone who has worked with individuals with mental illness that is an incredibly ignorant position to take.

Human behavior is controlled by the brain, which is an organ that can malfunction like any other organ in the body. Everything you do is based on the electro-chemical reactions in the brain. If this system is out of balance, many types of undesirable behavior can result.

Choose to ignore the huge body of research regarding drugs and mental illness; so be it. Ignorance is bliss for those who shy away from confronting the real issues.
 
Basically what some of you are saying is that mental illness does not exist. As someone who has worked with individuals with mental illness that is an incredibly ignorant position to take.

If you are referring to my post, I'd like to point out that that is *absolutely* not what I said. I am very, very familiar with various mental illnesses and the drugs used to treat them.

Mental illness can really mess up someone's life. But--it does not cause someone to kill. There is no disorder in the DSM-IV that list murder as a diagnostic criteria.

There are personalities more predisposed to violence and personalities with less empathy, but short of an extreme psychotic break, there is no such thing as a mental illness that causes someone to be unable to recognize that murder is wrong.

Those rare situations are why we have insanity please in criminal courts.
They are exceedingly rare compared to the overall incidence of mental illness.

I think this focus on a shooter's mental illness is a dangerous thing for people who have mental illness. Two murderers in one year, both depressive, both killing large numbers of people. Do you realize how many people are depressed and don't kill anyone? Or suffer anxiety disorders? Or have other mental or emotional problems?

You all saw this happening and immediately thought "oh no, they're gonna come after the guns." I saw this happening and immediately thought "Oh no, they're gonna come after the mentally ill."

People are more afraid of crazy people than they are of guns. Except for the "crazy" people it's not just a hobby, or a right, or something they do in their spare time. It is they themselves. And, by the way, the fear and hatred people have for the mentally ill is welcomed and sanctioned by the NRA, which has state repeatedly that "the mentally ill" should be disarmed.

Except that's kind of like saying that left-handed people shouldn't be allowed to drive cars. It's true--there is evidence that left-handers are more likely to die in car crashes or from other accidents (please don't ask me for a link--I haven't read up on that stuff in years, and it's not the point). The world is just friendlier to right-handers. And yet we recklessly allow left-handers to continue to drive cars at risk to the public; after all the percentage of left-handers who cause accidents is not disproportionate enough that it makes a difference. Besides, it would be horribly unfair and absurd and produce little public good.

Yeah, I feel kind of the same way about the mental illness discussion that arises every time something like this happens. There are lots of murders. Some are perpetrated my mentally ill people. There are lots of murders in general. The temptation to shake our heads and say "oh well, he was mentally ill, he shouldn't have had a gun" can get pretty strong. But the fact is that the overwhelmingly huge majority of people with mental illness don't kill.

They do tend to make less money, partly because insurers don't have to cover their most necessary medical care, because it is still acceptable to hate and fear people because of their mental illness, and because there is little to no support in the workplace for people with mental illnesses.

So, yes, mental illness exists.

No, it is not ok to blame murder on mental illness or on the treatment for it, except in cases of sever psychosis. Sometimes people just do things that are wrong. If someone feels like they don't have anything to live for, they may behave recklessly, or endanger themselves. That is an effect of mental illness. Being more easily shaken up and roused to anger? Yes, can be an effect of illness.

Through a series of deliberate actions, moving towards and through an act that destroys other people, violating the first and most important universally accepted rule in the social contract--Don't murder--is not mental illness.

It is just evil.

And that is all I have to say about that. :eek:
 
No, actually, that is not all I have to say about that.

Human behavior is controlled by the brain, which is an organ that can malfunction like any other organ in the body. Everything you do is based on the electro-chemical reactions in the brain. If this system is out of balance, many types of undesirable behavior can result

This is an awfully simplistic view of human behavior. It is supremely unbalanced. No, I do not behave only in accordance with my brain chemistry. My braind chemistry and the way I experience are molded by myriad influences, including culture and faith, not to mention, I daresay, the presence of my soul.

People have an enormous amount of control over what they do. If people didn't have control over their behavior we sure wouldn't need forums where people could endlessly pick apart the relative merits of the GOA and NRA, or the .45acp and the 9mm. To reduce all human behavior to an explanation of brain chemistry is to equate people with animals, and to remove everything that makes a person a person.

I suspect there aren't too many PETA members on THR, so I'm probably not alone in thinking that human behaviors cannot be broken down into an isolated series of chemical interactions.
 
People have an enormous amount of control over what they do.

You imply that there are some factors controlling a person's behavior, other than the brain. There are not. The brain controls all behavior; voluntary and involuntary. It's really that simple, and complex.
 
You imply that there are some factors controlling a person's behavior, other than the brain. There are not. The brain controls all behavior; voluntary and involuntary. It's really that simple, and complex

From a certain point of view. From another point of view saying that the brain controls all human behavior is kind of like saying that my computer controls what I write, or that my car is responsible for that fender-bender I was in last year.

People do have a choice, and while in the most absolute sense, no one can exist as a living human being without brain function, in another sense people have enormous control over how to manage all the functions at thier disposal.

Brains can malfunction, causing physical or mental illness. This very, very rarely negates that a choice was made to do a particular thing. In those cases usually it is due to faulty input mechanisms, iow perception of danger where none exists.

I hear what you are saying. I do not accept it as useful in this conversation. You seem to be trying to distract from the point of what I am saying by pointing out, fairly disingenuously, that, well, we can't do anything without our brains anyway and really everything comes down to brain function. In a very simple sense that is true. In another very simple sense, it is equally true that we make choices.
 
Please post a link indicating that the shooter had been on ADs. I haven't been able to find one.

Robert Hawkins could have been a healthy, stable and normal kid with the help of some real food, real nutrition and real love from a supporting family. Instead, he lived on junk food, worked at McDonald's and took medication pills as directed by his psychiatric doctor. The results speak for themselves: This recipe of processed food and mind-altering drugs created a monster, and yesterday in Omaha, that monster exploded in a rage of violence.

Please provide evidence that junk food and psychiatric medication are to blame in this case.

Want to learn the horrifying, yet true, history of modern psychiatry? Check out www.CCHR.org - the Citizens' Commission on Human Rights.

From the www.cchr.org website:
CCHR was founded in 1969 by the Church of Scientology...

Hardly an unbiased source.
 
Last edited:
It seems that the author of this article needs a lesson in the difference between correlation and causation:

"people taking antidepressants are more likely to commit suicide."

They're more likely to commit suicide anyway, without the drugs - THEY'RE DEPRESSED! The issue with blaming antidepressants for bad behavior is that the people who take the drugs have already been diagnosed with a mental illness. It's tough to make any determination of causation when you've got a population already predisposed to bizarre behavior.
 
Conqueror:

No...

Studies have found that, among people diagnosed with depression and considered suicide risks, those given antidepressants are more likely to commit suicide. The test was within the population you describe.

The article didn't elaborate; I read that a while ago already. It's been fairly well documented. Essentially, they make you feel better, unless they lead you to kill yourself.

Drugs can be like using dynamite to drill a hole. They have a lot of effects aside from what they're prescribed for. There's really no such thing as a "side-effect"; really, a drug does a bunch of things, and we are willing to tolerate some "bad" effects in return for the drug's beneficial ones. This gets a lot more tricky with mental illness than with sinus congestion.

As I wrote above, maybe depression is evolution's way of preventing us from following through on violent acts -- done to others or ourselves. Take away the depression with a drug, and you eliminate one of nature's safety valves, as it were.

We assume that depression is "bad" because depressed people don't take action to move forward in life, etc. But maybe it's not bad, when someone's current mode of action would be undesirable. Maybe sitting in front of the TV and wolfing pizza is a better thing than killing yourself, or others.

Of course, we want people to conquer depression and live full lives. But maybe just feeding them drugs doesn't always produce the desired result.
 
There's a difference between being depressed and wanting to kill yourself and wanting to go out as this week's news headline by taking a bunch of innocent people with you.

That's not to say that a drug can't mess with someone's mind. Perhaps it can amplify certain evil tendencies in an individual. But in most of these cases, it seems to me that the killer made a choice between good and evil.
 
Maybe depression is evolution's way of keeping people like this from having the wherewithal to kill others.

Take away the depression, and all you have is the evil.
I'd never looked at it that way ... interesting point.
 
Big Pharma is to blame for this one, not the manufacturer of the gun.
Passing the blame from the shooter no matter what.

About the author: Mike Adams is a natural health author and technology pioneer
I suspect if you were having heart trouble or cancer you wouldn't want your medical advice to come from Mr. Adams. I would be similiary concerned with his lack of medical training when it comes to discussing mental health issues. He can eat all the organic food he wants but his advice is unfounded at best and dangerous to those he deters from seeking treatment at worst.
 
Granted, the general tone of "blame these drugs - without the drugs there will be no shootings!" is the same, flawed argument the antis use for guns themselves.

I'm not totally sure about that. There's no doubt that one of the biggest differences between kids now and kids at all other times in history is the much higher use of powerful, psychoactive drugs to treat them. These pills were just starting to be used when I was in high school in the 80's, but didn't get widespread use until the 90's.

I wouldn't rule it out. A firearm cannot make you crazy--but some pills really can.

I suspect if you were having heart trouble or cancer you wouldn't want your medical advice to come from Mr. Adams.

True, but just because the naturopaths aren't very good at treating broken bones and bad hearts doesn't meen the allopaths *REALLY* know what the heck they're doing. In my book, most of them are quacks from naturopaths to chiros to allopaths. Much of what they do has no real scientific support. It's just based on custom and biased, unverified clinical observations.

I've deposed many Psychs in my practice, and when you pin them down under penalty of perjury and force of law, it's amazing how little there is to actually support their treatments. When it comes to the mind in particular, THEY ARE BASICALLY GUESSING. Nobody knows what the heck the long term side effects of a lot of these drugs will be. They don't even really understand why some seem to work and others don't. They push various pills until they find a combination that seems to help a particular person. If a patient doesn't get better or offs themselves, well that's just the way it is. They were suicidal anyway, after all.

I'd go to an orthopod for a busted hip, but never a psych. I've seen good friends turned into drooling shadows of their former selves by the pill pushers. True they're not depressed anymore, but that's because they're not *anything* anymore. One of my best friends from HS is still living in his parent's basement on one mix of pills or another. One of the smartest people I've ever known and he can barely function. But once you're on it, there's no getting off. The stuff is no different from crack. I would only advocate it to chemically lobotomize the extremely violent. To do it as a form of treatment for folks who are just a little nutty is inhuman.
 
Of course! Blame the antidepressants. Blame the guns. Blame the ammunition. Blame the manufacturers of the guns and ammunition. Blame the store that sold the guns and ammunition. Blame the victims. Blame the video games. Blame the lead paint and the lead toys and the whacky hormones in milk...

It's everyone's fault but the trigger man. God forbid someone blames him or his family or his parents or his upbringing... we can't have personal responsibility, we aren't responsible enough.
 
I was almost going along with the article until the author tossed this in:
-- and jacked up on junk foods (he worked at McDonald's) --
... at that point any credibility (s)he may have had was flushed right down the toilet and I stopped reading. I don't eat at McDonald's (haven't set foot in one for many years) but to claim someone can be "jacked up" on fast food is absurd.
 
From a certain point of view. From another point of view saying that the brain controls all human behavior is kind of like saying that my computer controls what I write, or that my car is responsible for that fender-bender I was in last year.
Facetiously speaking, your car is somewhat responsible for that fender-bender, as it sure it difficult to have one without a car :D.

People do have a choice, and while in the most absolute sense, no one can exist as a living human being without brain function, in another sense people have enormous control over how to manage all the functions at thier disposal.
That choice-making process occurs in the brain (mostly in the prefrontal cortex). If you damage that area (lesions, hematomas, developmental injury, etc) then behavior is DRASTICALLY altered. Inhibition and decision making abilities are reduced greatly. Phineas Gage, the railroad worker whose personality (and therefore interpersonal relationship capacity) were negatively affected by a steel tamping rod taking out part of his prefrontal cortex, is a perfect example. Physical injury as well as mental illness can cause drastic impairment of decision making ability, the base level of which differs by age. In other words, teens don't typically show the same level of prefrontal arousal as adults do, even in normal populations, meaning that adolescents aren't as good at making sound choices. That doesn't make a person into a killer, by any stretch of the imagination, but it does substantiate one very critical lesson: adolescents need caregivers who will direct them towards sound choices. They need guidance.

I'm not so far from being a teen that I've forgotten how stupid I acted sometimes, especially when my emotions overrode my reasoning. Thankfully, I had a good social net, including responsive parents (who whooped my ass, which put me in the right direction; responsive doesn't mean pampering). Adolescents on average are physically incapable of the decision making ability of adults on average. There are exceptions in each direction (and it seems that these people on the low end make the most trouble for us, heh), and I wouldn't be surprised if this particular teen was low even in his age group, making him even more prone to flying off the handle.

Brains can malfunction, causing physical or mental illness. This very, very rarely negates that a choice was made to do a particular thing. In those cases usually it is due to faulty input mechanisms, iow perception of danger where none exists.
In the cases of mental illness, it wouldn't be the input sensory information, but the cognitive processing/routing of input information. Almost all depressive/anxious disorders are highly involved with faulty cognition. Symptoms can be partially controlled with prescriptions, though ideally these are stopgap measures during which a psychotherapist can help the patient break out of the cycle of depressive/anxious cognitions (like evaluations of worth/success, etc). I really dislike the "prescribe-and-forget" kind of doctoring.

I hear what you are saying. I do not accept it as useful in this conversation. You seem to be trying to distract from the point of what I am saying by pointing out, fairly disingenuously, that, well, we can't do anything without our brains anyway and really everything comes down to brain function. In a very simple sense that is true. In another very simple sense, it is equally true that we make choices.
We make choices with our brains. It is overly simplistic to say that brain chemistry is all she wrote; that would ignore the majority of neurological and psychological understanding. However, it is very true that the brain is the organ involved with complex decision making, and the choices we make are built on previous personal experience, vicariously learned experience (which, when positive, we like to call "wisdom"), societal/cultural pressures, and many other factors, the knowledge of which is stored in the brain.

If we want to prevent this kind of event from occurring in the future, the solution is not to ban firearms; that would only treat a symptom, much like SSRI and ADHD medication. In some places/people, treating the symptom is enough. However, the problem here in the US cannot be quick-fixed; we've got to treat the illness itself. Ask yourself: what was it about American culture, especially youth oriented, before this rash of mass killings occurred? I can tell you this much: it sure wasn't the guns.


It's everyone's fault but the trigger man. God forbid someone blames him or his family or his parents or his upbringing... we can't have personal responsibility, we aren't responsible enough.
I don't want my replies to sound like I'm blaming everyone but "the trigger man." He is definitely the culpable party.

As a deeply analytical thinker, though, I have to ask this one question: WHY WAS HE THE TRIGGER MAN?

Just saying "he was crazy" doesn't explain anything. If he had a $%@#-y upbringing, was inappropriately prescribed mind-altering drugs, etc, and these factors influenced his poor decision making, then we should learn as a society how to avoid this from happening again. I highly doubt that a gun could cause it, as a gun can't influence how you think. Psychotropic drugs CAN, and we should all be very, very weary of what we put into our systems (as well as our children's!)
 
"Why" is interesting to some people. We can't all ask "why" about everything. That's why there's specialization in the sciences.

Seems to me that, if we can ID and eliminate the threat before it comes to fruition, that will leave more room for asking "why", without piles of dead people around.

we should learn as a society how to avoid this from happening again

Shoot him before he can kill so many people?

I mean, if it IS because of some drug, sure, we can not give kids that drug.

But if people are evil/crazy/dysfunctional/assholic/whatever, and we have a society that doesn't resemble Orwell's 1984, then those people might just find each other, screw, and reproduce. Their genes, emotional issues, etc., will be passed on, even magnified.

What, as a society, do we do? Sterilize people? Monitor them with remote video and have a panel of shrinks evaluate them for suitability for breeding?
 
Correlation does not signify causality, folks. Crazy people are prescribed antidepressants. Those drugs might not work as they were intended, and then the people taking them do something horrible. Other factors are at play besides whatever medication was being ingested.

You cannot name a mass shooting in recent history where the perpetrator was not on antidepressants.

The above remark seems to insinuate that antidepressants are the cause of these mass shootings. The truth is it is the people who carry these shootings out that are the cause of them. It is unlikely that a medication, unless GROSSLY misused or misprescribed, would be capable of influencing its user to do such a thing. No responsibly administered medication would put the idea of committing mass murder into a person's head where there wasn't an inclination before.
 
You cannot name a mass shooting in recent history where the perpetrator was not on antidepressants.

So far, no one has provided proof that this shooter was on ADs. Let's see a link.
 
You cannot name a mass shooting in recent history where the perpetrator was not on antidepressants.
I haven't tried to verify that claim but assuming its true, why would you find that odd? Mentally healthy people don't kill 9 strangers in a mall.
 
Mentally healthy people don't kill 9 strangers in a mall.

I don't think that's the point. I think the point is that all of these folks have been "in the system" from a psychological point of view but for whatever reason were never properly identified as being a true danger to anyone.

That's why you see folks saying that Psychiatry may not have all the answers that it claims to. Not that it's a false science, just that it's really not that good yet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top