Explosive: Psychiatric Diagnosis, Surveillance State Linked

TruthFact
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
By: Jon Rappoport
July 23, 2017

Pay close attention to this one. It’s the future coming at you like a strong wind.

First, a bit of background. As my readers know, I’ve assembled conclusive proof that psychiatric diagnosis of mental disorders is a fraud. It’s pseudoscience. There are no defining lab tests. No definitive blood, saliva, hair, brain, genetic tests.

Instead, committees of psychiatrists meet and discuss arbitrary clusters of behaviors, group them and label them with “mental-disorder” names.

But diehards insist that one of the earliest and oldest disorders, schizophrenia, is the exception. That one is solid. That one isn’t pseudoscience. That one is the “gold standard.”

Wrong.

As fiercebiotech.com reports, “…Diagnosing schizophrenia relies on subjective methods…There is no single test for schizophrenia, so diagnosis typically involves observing symptoms and ruling out other potential causes for them…”

Want more? Fiercebiotech: “And while scientists have observed differences in brain scans of healthy people and those with schizophrenia…these are not currently used to diagnose the neurological disorder, according to the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH).” Not used because the brain scans aren’t precise or definitive.

Same old, same old. Committees of psychiatrists “observe symptoms” (behaviors) and invent rules for diagnosis of schizophrenia.

As usual, the public is the last to know.

Now, there is a new project afoot that aims to change the non-objective diagnosis, using MRI images of the brain. IBM and the University of Alberta are working on it:

Fiercebiotech (see also this press release): “The team used machine learning to create a model that identifies schizophrenia based on connections in the brain, IBM said. The fMRI data was taken from different sites, using different machines, but the algorithm could differentiate between the patients with schizophrenia and without 74% of the time.”

No one is popping champagne corks. This was a small pilot study using 95 volunteers. Typically, these projects die out when larger studies are done, because the results aren’t specific enough.

That’s why NO brain tests, for ANY so-called mental disorder, are labeled definitive in the psychiatric bible, the DSM, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual.

However, the computer boys and medical pros keep trying—and here is where the Surveillance State enters the scene in an ugly way.

Fiercebiotech: “Mindstrong Health, cofounded by former NIMH [National Institute of Mental Health, a federal agency] chief Tom Insel, is working on technology that analyzes smartphone data to determine a person’s mental state. The company’s tech collects information on which words are used, or a person’s location when using certain apps, for example, and turns them into objective measures of brain function. The company recently raised $14 million…”

“Meanwhile, Boston-based Akili Interactive and Pfizer reported data last year showing that a video game-based diagnostic test could distinguish between people with and without brain amyloidosis, a hallmark of Alzheimer’s disease. And PureTech’s Sonde Health is working on the analysis of ‘vocal biomarkers,’ or changes in nonlinguistic characteristics of a person’s voice, to indicate changes in health.”

To make a long story short: spy on everybody through their cell phones and computers, in order to diagnose them with ANY mental disorder.

The Surveillance State gets a new justification, and the psychiatric establishment gets to play Big Brother, “to protect us all” from mentally ill persons.

This research was kicked into a higher gear by Obama’s Brain Mapping Project, which he announced in the wake of the Sandy Hook school shooting. The Project is necessary, he claimed, to help prevent such future tragedies.

No, the Project is necessary to expand surveillance of the population, for the sake of control.

Psychiatric diagnosis, and the toxic drugging that follows, IS a form of control.

“Well, we have a red-flagged subject in Boston who’s been using key words in his cell phone calls, and the non-linguistic pauses and voice inflections indicate he’s demonstrating a schizoid pattern. According to outlined procedures, we need to step up surveillance on him, do a deep check on his financials, quietly interview a few of his friends and co-workers, determine his voting record, find out what groups he belongs to. He’s a college professor. He teaches American history. Do we have anything on how he interprets the Founding Fathers, the Constitution…oh look, he seems to be making statements about the need to return to limited central government…we’ve got a live one, guys. Get busy…”

Diagnose the prof with schizoid tendencies and put him on an anti-psychotic drug, which will sink him into a brain haze and slow down his motor reflexes, at minimum.

Psychiatry and the Surveillance State:

Kissing cousins.

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Revisiting Psychopathy

Source: CorbettReport.com
James Corbett
July 24, 2017

SHOW NOTES & MP3: https://www.corbettreport.com/?p=3515 Previously on The Corbett Report we examined the topic of psychopathy. A number of articles, papers, documentaries and books have emerged to shed more light on the issue. But as this growing understanding of psychopathy begins to shape the way we understand the global economic collapse and the moves toward political tyranny, do we run the risk of starting a new witch hunt? Link to ‘I Am Fishead’ documentary: http://bit.ly/2urqoHP

I Am Fishead: Are Corporate Leaders Egotistical Psychopaths?
Time Reference: 04:36

 

Episode 090 – Our Leaders Are Psychopaths
Time Reference: 06:23

 

Weeding out corporate psychopaths
Time Reference: 07:43

 

The Corporate Psychopaths Theory of the Global Financial Crisis
Time Reference: 10:16

 

Interview 423 – Clive Boddy
Time Reference: 10:29

 

Defense Against the Psychopath (Video)
Time Reference: 18:20

 

Defense Against the Psychopath (Book Excerpt)
Time Reference: 27:22

 

Website of Dr. Robert Hare
Time Reference: 29:44

 

Blade Runner VK Test on Leon
Time Reference: 31:20

 

Bladerunner – Film, Literature and the New World Order
Time Reference: 34:22

 

The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson
Time Reference: 35:27

SICK: Children under six are being prescribed antidepressants by doctors

Image: SICK: Children under six are being prescribed antidepressants by doctors
Source: NaturalNews.com
Frances Bloomfield
June 22, 2017

What sort of world are we living in when children below the age of six are being given antidepressants? A rather sordid one if the National Health Service (NHS) figures are anything to go by. Of the 198,906 prescriptions of antidepressants handed out to those under 18 in the UK, a shocking 12,756 of those were children between the ages of seven and 12, while 617 of them were aged six and younger. Even more disturbing is that these statistics covered the period between April 2015 to September 2016, so those figures may have only inflated since then.

According to the organization Young Minds, that may very well be the case. The rates of anxiety and depression among teenagers have grown a staggering 70 percent in the last 25 years. Further statistics from the charity paint more disturbing picture: three in four children with a diagnosable mental health condition are unable to access the support they need.

This support, of course, being psychological therapy, which should be given to them in the first place instead of antidepressants like setraline and fluoxetine, more commonly known as Zoloft and Prozac. As per the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), children under 18 should be prescribed antidepressants only if they suffer from moderate or severe depression. And even then, these should be given alongside psychological treatment. Among children between the ages of five and 11, they should be given antidepressants only when therapy has failed them.

“The rise in the number of children and young people being prescribed antidepressants is worrying,” Marc Bush, senior policy adviser at Young Minds, told the DailyMail.co.uk. “Long waiting times and high thresholds for treatment mean that [general practitioners] may feel under pressure to prescribe antidepressants to children. There can be a place for medication in treating young people’s mental health problems, but it shouldn’t be used as a sticking plaster for poor access to talking therapies.” (Related: Antidepressant drugs may cause aggressive, violent behavior in youth)

Indeed, the sheer volume of antidepressant prescriptions may speak loudly about the state of healthcare more than anything else.

“There is no doubt a significant link between the growing use of antidepressants and the immense pressure children’s mental health services are under,” said Norman Lamb, health spokesman for the Liberal Democrat party. “Children’s mental health services are in desperate need of more resources. The Conservative government has failed to invest properly and has failed to make good on the funding promises we made in the coalition. Money isn’t getting through to the frontline, and now we are seeing the consequences of this neglect.”

Yet as disconcerting as these figures are, the UK isn’t the first country to have them. In 2009, five deaths have already been linked to antidepressants in Australian children aged 10 to 19; moreover, 89 recorded adverse reactions in children under nine were associated with antidepressants. Dr. Joe Tucci, Chief Executive of the Australian Childhood Foundation, said: “I cannot think of a good reason why any six-year-old, or younger, should be treated with antidepressants. I think it’s gone up because medication is being used to treat the symptoms and not the cause.”

Whatever the case, antidepressants should only be prescribed when all other options have been thoroughly exhausted. They are temporary fixes for children, not solutions.

For other stories about mental health, visit Psychiatry.news.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources include:

DailyMail.co.uk
YoungMinds.org.uk
DailyTelegraph.com.au
TheGuardian.com

The Violence-Inducing Effects of Psychiatric Medication

The Violence-Inducing Effects of Psychiatric Medication
Source: GreenMedInfo.com
Kelly Brogan, M.D.
May 23, 2017

Originally published on KellyBroganMd.com

Psychiatric medications have some dangerous, often-overlooked side effects, which could include suicide and homicide.

On May 17, 2017, we learned that Chris Cornell of Soundgarden had reportedly committed suicide by hanging. His family reports knowing a different Chris than one who would make this fatal decision, and suspect his anti-anxiety prescription in the altered state he was witnessed to be in the night he died. Perhaps an “addict turned psychiatric patient”, like so many, Chris Cornell seemed to have left the frying pan of substance abuse for the fire of psychiatric medication risks.

For reasons that remain mysterious, those under the influence of psychiatric medication often specifically choose to hang themselves in their moment of peak impulsivity. Some, like Kim’s husband Woody who was never depressed a day in his life but prescribed Zoloft by his internist, even verbalize a felt experience of his head coming apart from his body in the days before he was found hanged in his garage.

Then there’s 14 year old Naika, a foster child in Florida who hanged herself on a FB livestream after being treated with 50mg of Vyvanse, a drug treatment for ADHD that leads to a domino effect of diagnoses and psychiatric meds including a 13 fold increase in likelihood of being prescribed an antipsychotic medication and 4 fold increase in antidepressant medications than controls.[1]

Are these just rare anecdotes? Is this just the cost of treatment that is helpful for most? Are we blaming medication for what might have been severe mental illness that was undertreated and/or undiagnosed?

Informed consent: the premise of ethical medicine

I believe first and foremost in informed consent. If you are informed of the risks, benefits, and alternatives to a given treatment, you will be empowered to make the best decision for yourself based on your personal, family, philosophical, and religious life context. But the truth is that prescribers are not in a position to share the known risks of medications because we learn only of their purported benefits with a short-tagline of dismissively rare risks that are thought to be invariably outweighed by the presenting clinical concern.

But what about serious risks – including impulsive suicide and homicide – surely we are informing patients of that possibility, right?

Wrong.

In fact, the FDA and the pharmaceutical industry have gone to great lengths to conceal multiple signals of harm so we certainly can’t expect your average prescriber to have done the investigative work required to get at the truth.

In fact, from 1999-2013, psychiatric medication prescriptions have increased by a whopping 117% concurrent with a 240% increase in death rates from these medications[2]. So let’s review some of the evidence that suggests that it may not be in your best interest or the best interest of those around you for you to travel the path of medication-based psychiatry. Because, after all, if we don’t screen for risk factors – if we don’t know who will become the next victim of psych-med-induced violence – then how can we justify a single prescription? Are we at a point in the history of medicine where random acts of personal and public violence are defensible risks of treatment for stress, anxiety, depression, inattention, psychosocial distress, irritable bowel syndrome, chronic fatigue, and even stress incontinence?

Let the science speak

Suicide

Prescribed specifically to “prevent” suicide, antidepressants now come with a black box warning label of suicide risk since 2010. Multi-billion dollar lawsuits like the settlement of Study 329[3] have been necessary to unlock the cabinet drawers of an industry that cares more about profit than human lives. A reanalysis of study 329[4] which initially served as a landmark study in 2001 supporting the prescription of antidepressants to children, has now demonstrated that these medications are ineffective in this population and play a causal role in suicidal behavior. Concealing and manipulating data that shows this signal of harm, including a doubling of risk of suicide with antidepressant treatment,[5] [6] [7] has generated seeming confusion around this incomprehensibly unacceptable risk profile. In fact, a reanalysis[8] of an influential US National Institute of Mental Health 2007 study, revealed a four-fold increase in suicide despite the fact that the initial publication[9] claimed no increased risk relative to placebo.

According to available data – 3 large meta-analyses – more psychiatric treatment means more suicide.[10] [11] [12] Well, that might seem a hazard of the field, right? Where blaming medications for suicide would be like saying that umbrellas cause the rain.

That’s why studies in non-suicidal subjects[13] and even healthy volunteers who went on to experience suicidality after taking antidepressants are so compelling[14].

Benzodiazepines (like what Cornell was taking) and hypnotics (sleep and anxiety medications) also have a documented potential to increase risk of completed and attempted suicide[15] and have been implicated in impulsive self-harm including self-inflicted stab wounds during changes to dosage[16]. We also find the documented possibility that suicidality could emerge in patients who are treated with this class of medications even when they are not suicidal with recent research stating, “benzodiazepine receptor agonist hypnotics can cause parasomnias, which in rare cases may lead to suicidal ideation or suicidal behavior in persons who were not known to be suicidal”[17]. And, of course, these medications themselves provide the means and the method with a known lethal poisoning profile[18].

Homicide

Clearly murderers are mentally ill, right? What if I told you that the science supports the concern that we are medicating innocent civilians into states of murderous impulsivity?

When Andrew Thibault began to research the safety of a stimulant drug recommended to his son, he entered a rabbit hole he has yet to emerge from. After literally teaching himself code to decrypt the data on the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System website, he was able to cull 2000 pediatric fatalities from psychotropic medications, and 700 homicides. A Freedom of Information Act and a lawsuit later, he continues to struggle with redacted and suppressed information around 24 homicides directly connected to the use of psychotropics including the homicide by a 10 year old treated with Vyvanse of an infant. Another case, ultimately recovered, involved statements from a 35 year old perpetrator/patient, who murdered her own daughter, as directly implicating as “When I took nortriptyline, I immediately wanted to kill myself. I’d never had thoughts like that before”.

To begin to scientifically explore the risk of violence induced by psychotropic medication, a study sample needs to be representative, the reason for taking the drug needs to be taken into consideration, the effect needs to be controlled for, as do any other intoxicants. Professor Jari Tiihonen’s research group analysed the use of prescription drugs of 959 persons convicted of a homicide in Finland and found that pre-crime prescription of benzodiazepines and opiates resulted in the highest risk (223% increase) of committing homicide[19].

Relatedly, eleven antidepressants, six sedative/hypnotics and three drugs for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder represented the bulk of 31 medications associated with violence reported to the FDA[20]. Now an international problem, a Swedish registry study identified a statistically significant increase in violence in males and females under 25 years old prescribed antidepressants[21].

Implicated in school shootings, stabbings, and even the Germanwings flight crash, prescribing of psychotropics prior to these incidences has been catalogued on https://ssristories.org/ leading me to suspect psychiatric prescribing as the most likely cause in any and all reports of unusually violent behavior in the public sphere.

Is Association Really Causation?

Beyond the cases where violence to self or others was induced in a non-violent, non-depressed, non-psychotic individual, what other evidence is there that speaks to how this could possibly be happening?

The most seminal paper in this regard, in my opinion, was published in 2011 by Lucire and Crotty[22]. Ten cases of extreme violence were committed by patients who were prescribed antidepressants – not for major mental illness or even for depression – but for psychosocial distress (ie work stress, dog died, divorce). What these authors identified was that these ten subjects had variants to liver enzymes responsible for drug metabolism exacerbated by co-administration of other drugs and substances including herbs. All returned to their baseline personalities when the antidepressant was discontinued.

Now referred to as akathisia-induced impulsivity[23], the genetic risk factors for this Russian Roulette of violence are not screened for prior to psychotropic prescribing. Akathisia is a state of severe restlessness associated with thoughts of suicide and homicide. Many patients describe it as a feeling-less state of apathy – and what I would describe as a disconnection from their own souls, their own experience of human connection, and any measure of self-reflection.

The genetic underpinnings of this kind of medication-induced vulnerability are just beginning to be explored[24] with identification of precursor symptoms to violence including severe agitation. In a randomized, placebo-controlled trial, healthy volunteers exhibited an almost 2 fold increased risk of symptoms that can lead to violence[25]. A 4-5 fold increased risk was noted in patients prescribed a generic version of the antidepressant Cymbalta, off-label, for stress urinary incontinence (a non-psychiatric indication)[26].

There is another way

Perhaps it’s as if we are offering the blade edge of a knife to those falling off the cliff of struggle and suffering. Because the idea of managing a chemical imbalance with chemicals seems to make sense. But at what cost? The laundry list of acute and chronic adverse effects is growing, and the unpredictable risk of medication-induced violence should lead to an urgent cessation of all psychotropics. Because it takes 17 years[27] for physician practice to reflect published science, we need grassroots level information sharing. We need to inform ourselves before we consent to engage a system that regards you as an impersonal statistic.

We live in a cultural context that makes no room for the relevance, meaning, and significance of symptoms – symptoms are simply bad and scary and they must be managed. We don’t make room for patients to ask why they are not ok.

If you knew that your symptoms were reversible, healable, transformable, you might consider walking that path instead of assuming this level of risk for placebo-level efficacy of psychotropic medication. We would only euthanize a “mental patient” if we felt their condition was lifelong and unremitting. In fact, every woman I have ever tapered off of psychiatric drugs into experiences of total vitality once believed that she would be a medicated psychiatric patient for life. If you knew that radical self-healing potential lies within each and every one of us, if you only knew that was possible, you might start that journey today. It’s side effect free…

Read More At: GreenMedInfo.com

References

[1] http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0706743716689055

[2] http://meps.ahrq.gov/mepsweb/data_stats/download_data_files_results.jsp?cboDataYear=All&cboDataTypeY=2%2CHousehold+Event+File&buttonYearandDataType=Search&cboPufNumber=All&SearchTitle=Prescribed+Medicines

[3] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11437014 

[4] http://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h4320

[5] http://www.bmj.com/content/330/7488/396

[6] http://www.bmj.com/content/352/bmj.i65?etoc=

[7] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12601224

[8] http://content.iospress.com/articles/international-journal-of-risk-and-safety-in-medicine/jrs0645

[9] http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=210055

[10] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15555028 

[11] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26713983_The_Relationship_Between_General_Population_Suicide_Rates_and_Mental_Health_Funding_Service_Provision_and_National_Policy_a_Cross-National_Study 

[12] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252713000587 

[13] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2301661/

[14] http://davidhealy.org/articles/#Suicide_Articles

[15] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28257172

[16] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2047018/ 

[17] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27609243

[18] http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2016.303061

[19] https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-06/uoef-fsa052515.php

[20] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3002271/ 

[21] http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001875

[22] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3513220/ 

[23] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27138119 

[24] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27324805 

[25] http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0141076816666805

[26] http://www.cmaj.ca/content/189/5/E194 

[27] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22179294

Dr. Kelly Brogan – Depression: Busting Myths & Finding Answers

TheBreakaway
Vid Source: SacredScienceDoc
Zy Marquiez
April 3, 2017

Dr. Kelly Brogan’s book, A Mind Of Your Own – The Truth About Depression, was one of the top 3 Books of the Year for 2016 at The Breakaway. The depth and scope of the information presented within that book was not unlike what Dr. Peter Breggin did in his quintessential Toxic Psychiatry.

Interviewed below, Dr. Brogan goes into many of the pervasive myths taking place within the field while offering her insights on issues within psychiatry.
__________________________________________________________________________

To learn more about alternative ways of treating depression and other conditions, visit us at http://www.thesacredscience.com/.

A few months ago we had the chance to sit down with Dr. Kelly Brogan, a NYC-based psychiatrist who’s offering a new approach to healing.

Trained in the ways of Western Medicine, but having seen first hand the way the system has evolved into what it is today, under the influence of pharmaceuticals, she is shining the light on some very important truths and turning everything we know about the topic of depression on its head.

The question “is pain and suffering a good thing?” might seem like something only the Dalai Llama would ask, but in our interview, Kelly discusses how going through tough times and hardships actually make us stronger, and equip us with the tools to combat even harder struggles down the line.

If you’re interested in learning about the true meaning of depression and how to treat it the right way, or what we may be losing by the death of the rites of passage, or why all mainstream media outlets said no to sharing the information in her new book “A Mind of Your Own,” even though it was backed by one of the biggest names in publishing, you should definitely watch this interview.

The knowledge she shares will change the way you think about what you or your loved ones have gone through, or are going through now, and more importantly, how to move forward in the best way possible…

Taking Antidepressants During Pregnancy Adversely Affects Babies’ Brain Chemistry, Finds Study

[Editor’s Note]

For those wishing for more information about this important subject please read:

A Mind Of Your Own – The Truth About Depression & How Women Can Heal Their Bodies by Dr. Kelly Brogan
Toxic Psychiatry – Dr. Peter Breggin

Pregnant women
Source: NaturalNews.com
Isabelle Z.
June 24, 2016

There is now another reason to be concerned about the effects of antidepressant use, particularly if you’re pregnant. A new study out of the Helsinki University Children’s Hospital has uncovered a link between the use of antidepressants by pregnant women, and brain abnormalities in their newborns.

Unfortunately, 15 percent of pregnant women are believed to suffer from depression or anxiety, and around 5 percent of the babies born in the U.S. each year are believed to be exposed to antidepressants in the womb.

Researcher Sampsa Vanhatalo said: “We found many changes in the brain activity of SRI-exposed newborns. Since the changes did not correlate with the mother’s psychiatric symptoms, we have assumed that they resulted as a side effect of maternal drug treatment.”

The researchers are calling for more investigations into the effects of these drugs on fetal brain function. They emphasize the importance of choosing non-pharmacological interventions to treat anxiety and depression in pregnant women.

This study was the first one that directly studied SSRI exposure’s effects on newborn brain activity. It involved 22 mothers who were taking SSRI meds, and 62 controls who did not take any medication.

Some of the effects noted in the electrical activity in the brains of those who were exposed to SSRIs, include weaker synchronization between cortical rhythms, and lower levels of organization in the communication between brain hemispheres.

This study comes on the heels of another recent study that found permanent changes in the areas of the brain responsible for mood and cognition in the brains of mice whose mothers took SSRIs during pregnancy.

Antidepressant use during pregnancy linked to a number of risks

This finding joins a laundry list of other developmental and fetal complications that have already been linked to antidepressant use during pregnancy.

A study published in JAMA Pediatrics found a link between antidepressant use and the development of autism. In that study, University of Montreal researchers found that women who took SSRIs during their second and third trimester of pregnancy had twice the likelihood of giving birth to a baby who would go on to develop autism.

Autism is not the only issue mothers who take antidepressants might have to contend with as their children grow. Research from Canada’s McMaster University discovered that the use of SSRI antidepressants in pregnancy was correlated with obesity, diabetes, and other metabolic complications such as fatty liver in adult offspring.

Another potential risk associated with taking antidepressants during pregnancy is premature birth. A Danish study discovered that women who take SSRIs while pregnant have double the risk of giving birth prematurely than do women who do not take these drugs.

How can pregnant women deal with depression safely?

Even women who are not pregnant would do well to try alternative options for dealing with depression first, given the other serious side effects caused by antidepressants, including the tendency to commit suicide and carry out violent acts.

There are several methods that expectant mothers can use to cope with depression that do not have dangerous side effects for their unborn children. Some people are quick to dismiss alternative methods, but a study out of Johns Hopkins University actually found that meditation is every bit as effective as antidepressants in treating depression and anxiety. This is an excellent starting point for pregnant women, as it does not carry any potential risks.

In addition, eating the right foods can help, not only with depression, but also with giving your child the best start in life. This means eating organic fruits and vegetables and whole grains. Exercise and yoga can also help boost your mood, although pregnant women should use caution and avoid exercises that are too strenuous.

Spending some time outdoors connecting with nature is an often-overlooked yet effective method of dealing with depression. A Stanford University study found that people noted a decrease in negative self-talk after a 90-minute walk in nature, and brain scans actually showed less activity in the part of the brain that is active during the maladaptive thinking that is linked with depression.

The best news is that all of these approaches can bring about other benefits for your unborn child. Healthy eating means your baby won’t be exposed to the many toxins found in processed food, while getting more physical activity can boost your overall health.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Another Study Proves This Simple Activity Rejuvenates The Brain

person in nature
Source: NaturalSociety.com
Christina Sarich
June 11, 2016

There is already a bevy of studies that prove spending time in nature has amazing health benefits. Spending micro-breaks outdoors can rejuvenate the brain. Kids who spend more time in green spaces have elevated cognitive functioning on tests and also enjoy lower stress levels. The list of ways that Mother Nature nurtures our minds is growing, with a study from last year adding to the multitude of positive benefits we get from spending time outdoors.

The new study, by Stanford’s Gregory Bratman and several colleagues from the United States and Sweden, was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, comes from the field of cognitive neuroscience. By scanning neural signatures in the brain after people spent time in nature (people in Japan refer to this as forest bathing), researchers found some interesting results.

Thirty-eight participants with “no history of mental disorder” were divided into two groups and asked to take a walk. One group walked for 90 minutes near the natural area of the Stanford campus, and the other group walked along a busy roadway (El Camino Real) in downtown Palo Alto, California.

Both before and after their walks, the participants answered a questionnaire designed to measure their tendency to ‘ruminate’ on negative self-talk, an inward pattern of thinking that often leads to depression. They also had brain scans before and after their walks, with emphasis on examination of the subgenual prefrontal cortex of the brain – which the study calls:

“an area that has been shown to be particularly active during the type of maladaptive, self-reflective thought and behavioral withdrawal that occurs during rumination.”

As you may have guessed, participants who took the 90-minute nature walk showed a decrease in rumination. The decrease was measured by how they answered the questionnaire and also by their brain scans, which showed decreased activity in the subgenual prefrontal cortex.

Gregory Bratman, the lead author of the study explained:

“This provides robust results for us that nature experience, even of a short duration, can decrease this pattern of thinking that is associated with the onset, in some cases, of mental illnesses like depression.”

Continue Reading At: NaturalSociety.com