Re: US Senator finds that NAMI actually is a front group for Big Pharma
Greegor
group for Big Pharma
http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/644/36/
http://www.ahrp.org/cms/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=644
NAMI Constituency Betrayed
Tuesday, 27 October 2009
Sen. Grassley obtained documents confirming NAMI as a front group for
pharma companies who underwrite 3/4 of NAMI donations—in 2006 to 2008
that was a hefty $23 million.
[ US ]Senator Charles Grassley [ R - Iowa ] has hit the bull's eye
when he asked the NAMI (National Alliance on Mental Illness) to
submit
financial documents showing where it gets its funding. The documents
submitted to Sen. Grassley confirm that NAMI is a front organization
for pharmaceutical companies who underwrite 3/4 of NAMI donations—in
2006 to 2008 that was a hefty $23 million.
In return for industry's largesse, NAMI devotes its efforts to help
increase industry profits: NAMI promotes the most toxic drugs in
pharmacopoeia to its ostensible constituents—the families of persons
diagnosed with mental illness—disregarding the irrefutable,
documented
evidence of these very drugs’ propensity to induce debilitating,
irreversible severe adverse effects.
See: Anatomy of an Epidemic by Robert Whitaker:
Rather than putting its efforts on improving the quality of life with
humane care for the mentally ill, NAMI has been instrumental in
promoting the expanded use of toxic drugs even for use in children.
And NAMI has been instrumental in lobbying state and federal
legislators for unrestricted use of these highly toxic drugs and
increased taxpayer funding through Medicaid.
Documents have surfaced during the course of litigation indicating
the
extent to which NAMI cavorted with one or another drug maker,
promoting their antipsychotic drugs.
For example, the case against Pfizer brought by states attorney
general:
Pharmalot reported (Oct 23) that Jim Daily, NAMI Kentucky official,
accepted money to be on the AstraZeneca consultant program to promote
Seroquel:
NAMI refers to AstraZeneca as “a strong effective partner.
"The purpose of the Seroquel Consultant Program is to discuss ways
that AstraZeneca can better partner with our consumer groups at the
national, regional and local levels…” See, AstraZeneca letter to
Daily
Furthermore, Mike Fitzpatrick, NAMI’s Executive Director, made
presentations at an AstraZeneca meeting (2003) when he headed NAMI’s
policy research institute. His presentation, Pharmalot reports,
included details on the crisis in state budgets at the time, Medicaid
funding and tips on building community coalitions - at state and
local
levels - to further support for using antipsychotics.
The agenda at the meeting included a discussion of MAP initiatives.
MAP is an acronym for Medication Algorithm Project, a program that
began in Texas as a means of determining when to prescribe
psychotropic drugs - such as Seroquel and other antipsychotics - for
people in state-run programs. However, MAP has drawn controversy as
an
alleged stalking horse for drug makers that simply want to boost
prescriptions.
Beyond these questionable activities for a 501-C3 non-profit actively
working to divert much needed Medicaid funds on behalf of corporate
interests, the real crime is NAMI’s betrayal of the people it claims
to represent.
How many families were persuaded by corporate-generated propaganda
disseminated by NAMI (in return for "donations") into urging their
loved ones to ingest antipsychotic drugs—such as Risperdal, Zyprexa,
Geodon, Seroquel, Abilify?
How many family members suffered catastrophic, drug-induced
debilitating, irreversible harm as a result of false claims
disseminated by NAMI about these drugs' safey profile and benefits?
How many families buried loved ones who died as a result of a toxic
drug reaction from the drugs promoted by NAMI?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/22/health/22nami.html
Drug Makers Are Advocacy Group’s Biggest Donors
THE NEW YORK TIMES October 22, 2009 By GARDINER HARRIS
WASHINGTON — A majority of the donations made to the National
Alliance
on Mental Illness, one of the nation’s most influential disease
advocacy groups, have come from drug makers in recent years,
according
to Congressional investigators.
The alliance, known as NAMI, has long been criticized for
coordinating
some of its lobbying efforts with drug makers and for pushing
legislation that also benefits industry.
Last spring, Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, sent
letters to the alliance and about a dozen other influential disease
and patient advocacy organizations asking about their ties to drug
and
device makers. The request was part of his investigation into the
drug
industry’s influence on the practice of medicine.
The mental health alliance, which is hugely influential in many state
capitols, has refused for years to disclose specifics of its fund-
raising, saying the details were private.
But according to investigators in Mr. Grassley’s office and documents
obtained by The New York Times, drug makers from 2006 to 2008
contributed nearly $23 million to the alliance, about three-quarters
of its donations.
Even the group’s executive director, Michael Fitzpatrick, said in an
interview that the drug companies’ donations were excessive and that
things would change.
“For at least the years of ’07, ’08 and ’09, the percentage of money
from pharma has been higher than we have wanted it to be,” Mr.
Fitzpatrick said.
He promised that the industry’s share of the organization’s fund-
raising would drop “significantly” next year.
“I understand that NAMI gets painted as being in the pockets of
pharmaceutical companies, and somehow that all we care about is
pharmaceuticals,” Mr. Fitzpatrick said. “It’s simply not true.”
Mr. Fitzpatrick said Mr. Grassley’s scrutiny, which he described as
understandable given the attention paid to potential conflicts of
interest in medicine, had led his organization to begin posting on
its
Web site the names of companies that donate $5,000 or more. And he
predicted that other patient and disease advocacy groups would be
prodded by Mr. Grassley’s investigation to do the same.
“Everyone I talk to wants to have more balanced fund-raising,” Mr.
Fitzpatrick said.
In a statement, Mr. Grassley praised the alliance for its
disclosures.
“It’d be good for the system for other patient groups to do what NAMI
has done,” he said.
Mr. Grassley’s scrutiny has been unnerving for patient and disease
advocacy groups, which are often filled with sincere people who are
either afflicted with serious illnesses themselves or have family
members who have been affected. Many join the groups in the hope of
making sense of their misfortune by helping to find a cure or raising
awareness of a disease’s risks and frequency.
Drug makers are natural allies in these pursuits since cures may come
out of corporate laboratories and the industry’s money can help
finance public service campaigns and fund-raising dinners. But
industry critics have long derided some patient organizations as
little more than front groups devoted to lobbying on issues that
affect industry profits, and few have come under more scrutiny for
industry ties than the mental health alliance.
For years, the alliance has fought states’ legislative efforts to
limit doctors’ freedom to prescribe drugs, no matter how expensive,
to
treat mental illness in patients who rely on government health care
programs like Medicaid. Some of these medicines routinely top the
list
of the most expensive drugs that states buy for their poorest
patients.
Mr. Fitzpatrick defended these lobbying efforts, saying they were
just
one of many the organization routinely undertook.
The close ties between the alliance and drug makers were on stark
display last week, when the organization held its annual gala at the
Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium on Constitution Avenue in Washington.
Tickets were $300 each. Before a dinner of roasted red bell pepper
soup, beef tenderloin and tilapia, Dr. Stephen H. Feinstein, president
s sponsored this dinner at
the highest level,” Dr. Feinstein said.
He then introduced Dr. Fred Grossman, chief of neuroscience research
at Bristol-Myers, who told the audience that “now, more than ever,
our
enduring relationship with NAMI must remain strong.”
Documents obtained by The New York Times show that drug makers have
over the years given the mental health alliance — along with millions
of dollars in donations — direct advice about how to advocate
forcefully for issues that affect industry profits. The documents
show, for example, that the alliance’s leaders, including Mr.
Fitzpatrick, met with AstraZeneca sales executives on Dec. 16, 2003.
Slides from a presentation delivered by the salesmen show that the
company urged the alliance to resist state efforts to limit access to
mental health drugs.
“Solutions: Play Hard Ball,” one slide was titled. “Hold policy
makers
accountable for their decisions in media and in election,” it
continued.
The alliance’s own slides concluded by saying, “We appreciate
AstraZeneca’s strong support of NAMI.”
Mr. Fitzpatrick said that the alliance frequently had such meetings
and that the organization would fight for better access to mental
health drugs “even if we had no relationship with pharmaceutical
companies.”
Tony Jewell, an AstraZeneca spokesman, said that the company was
“committed to improving health through partnerships with nonprofit
organizations” and that “includes striving to ensure people can
access
our medicines through formularies managed by state Medicaid
agencies.”
http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/587/36/
NAMI Acknowledges: 56% of Budget Comes from Drug Companies
Wednesday, 06 May 2009
In its response to Sen. Grassley's probe, The National Alliance on
Mental Illness (NAMI) acknowledges that a majority of its funds over
the last five years, 56% on average, have come from drug
corporations.
It's time to set the record straight about NAMI: NAMI was founded
about 25 years ago. It was then called the National Alliance for the
Mentally Ill. The name change in recent years is significant: NAMI's
rise to become the #1 "advocacy" group in mental health, was almost
entirely due to the hefty financial support NAMI has received from
the
manufacturers of psychotropic drugs--in particular, manufacturers of
antidepressants, antipsychotics and anti-seizure drugs. These drugs
are at the center of heated controversy given their hazardous effects
and overall negative risk / benefit profile.
The name change from "Alliance for the mentally ill" to "Alliance on
[for] mental illness" should have alerted its constituents and the
public that this organization DOES NOT REPRESENT THE BEST INTEREST of
persons suffering from mental illness. NAMI now promotes mental
illness and psychotropic drugs.
Until NAMI was forced by Sen Grassley of the Senate Finance Committee
to identify its corporate donors it had continually refused to do so.
It remained the task of investigative journalists to do this job--as
when Mother Jones reported in 1999 that NAMI received $11+ million
over 5 years from Big Pharma, and an Eli Lilly executive operated out
of NAMI's headquarters directing major operations.
Parents and relatives who mobilized for NAMI and stridently pushed
its
"biologically-based" agenda were duped.
They did not realize that NAMI was greased by millions of dollars
from
drug manufacturers whose agendas conflicted with the best interest of
their loved ones.
They did not realize that the drugs promoted by NAMI were shortening
the lives of their loved ones and causing severe, debilitating
diseases, including diabetes, cardiovascular deaths, and metabolic
syndrome.
NAMI parents didn't know that NAMI's president Jim McNulty , from
2002
to 2004, was being paid thousands of dollars from drug companies for
promoting their products to NAMI parents.
NAMI parents didn't know that NAMI's executive director, was paid a
salary of $212,281 and another $10,090 in employee benefit
contributions and deferred compensation plans.
NAMI's capitulation to drug manufacturers--receiving fees for
services
rendered--represents a colossal betrayal of trust:
Eli Lilly, Pfizer, GlaxoSMithKline, et al, provided the $$$$ and NAMI
rendered lobbying and promotional services.
This has been a shameful, base, and unholy alliance that the late Dr.
Loren Moshe, our friend and AHRP board member, decried in 1999:
"The shortsightedness of this marriage of convenience between APA
[American Psychiatric Association], NAMI, and the drug companies(who
gleefully support both groups because of their shared pro-drug
stance)
is an abomination. I want no part of a psychiatry of oppression and
social control."
NAMI leadership have exploited parents' troubles and predicaments to
steer them into becoming drug pushers who serve industry's agenda--to
increase corporate profits.
Parents became lobbyists for drug manufacturers--not for life-
sustaining services for their loved ones; NAMI parents demanded
taxpayer subsidies for hazardous drugs that are shown to shorten
lives. Psychotropic drug cocktails are undermining the mental and
physical health of the people suffering from a mental disorder.
Parents became unwitting partners of a corrupt industry: an industry
that concealed evidence of drug-induced harm, and laid claim to
false,
unsubstantiated "benefits."
Below we reproduce a letter of "explanation" by NAMI's executive
director to its membership following the Senate Finance Committee
probe.
Once and for all, let's just call NAMI an industry front group: NAMI
has sold its raison d'etre sacrificing the welfare of its
constituents
for industry cash handouts.
Indeed, we believe that NAMI qualifies for an award for Really
Deceitful Shameful Practices masquerading as patient advocates.
http://www.mindfreedom.org/kb/psych-drug-corp/nami
LETTER FROM NAMI EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MICHAEL J. FITZPATRICK:
April 28, 2009
Dear NAMI Leaders and Members,
On April 6, 2009 Senator Charles Grassley asked NAMI national to
provide information about support it receives from pharmaceutical
companies. For the last three years, Senator Grassley has been
interested in various aspects of the pharmaceutical industry and has
made similar requests to other non-profit groups.
NAMI shares Senator Grassley's interest in transparency and has
cooperated fully with this request. Since the request was made, three
basic questions have been posed that are worth sharing and answering.
Does NAMI accept contributions from pharmaceutical companies?
Yes, we do -- and we're delighted to have this critical support for
our many programs and important work all across the country.
NAMI accepts charitable contributions from individuals, foundations
and corporations, including the pharmaceutical industry, for one
purpose -- to improve the lives of people with mental illness and
their families. These relationships are governed by NAMI's Guidelines
for Business Support Relationships, a NAMI policy originally
developed
and approved by the Board of Directors in 2004. This policy ensures
that at all times NAMI will maintain an independent position on
issues
affecting the welfare of people with mental illness. A copy of this
policy is available online at http://www.nami.org/BusinessGuidelines.
As you know from our strategic plan ( http://www.nami.org/stratplan
),
NAMI's goal is to reduce the percentage of our budget that is
supported by charitable donations from pharmaceutical companies.
While we deeply appreciate the support we have received, we set this
goal because we understand the value of diversifying our funding
sources -- both for fiscal stability and because we want to shed any
lingering, unfair accusations that somehow NAMI has been "bought" --
I
can assure you: nothing could be further from the truth. NAMI's
advocacy voice is loud and clear and uncompromised.
As reported to Senator Grassley, pharmaceutical companies contributed
an average of 56% of national NAMI's budget annually for the period
2005 to 2009. Many of NAMI's signature education programs, including
Family-to-Family, Peer-to-Peer, NAMI Connection, In Our Own Voice and
NAMI Basics have national corporate sponsors.
These programs are the essence of your work in your communities. They
are offered free of charge to thousands of consumers and families who
participate in them each year. Without support of these companies, we
would be hard-pressed to bring you these vital programs. Corporate
grants and charitable contributions also support the NAMI Web site,
Mental Illness Awareness Week, and other public education and
advocacy
efforts.
Can we see who is giving NAMI what?
Yes, you can.
NAMI National has long made public lists of major corporate and
foundation donors in our annual reports, which you can view online:
http://www.nami.org/governance .
In 2009, we have begun posting on the NAMI Web site on a quarterly
basis all foundation and corporate grants and corporate contributions
over $5,000 received by NAMI national. The first list covers January-
March 2009 and can also be viewed at http://www.nami.org/governance.
Now what?
We continue our incredibly important work together, at the national,
state and local level, on behalf of one of the most vulnerable and
discriminated against populations in our country.
NAMI has long enjoyed a great national reputation. In fact, NAMI is
one of only 248 national non-profit organizations that received the
BBB Wise Giving Alliance Charity Seal this year from the charity
monitoring organization affiliated with the Better Business Bureau.
Perhaps you saw BBB‚ adds in USA Today two weeks ago which heralded
the exclusive list. NAMI also received three out of four stars from
Charity Navigator and is its number one rated mental health
organization.
Thank you for the tremendous work you do, day in and day out. If you
have any thoughts or questions, I hope you will be in touch.
Thanks,
Mike
Michael J. Fitzpatrick, MSW
Executive Director
NAMI (National Alliance on Mental Illness)
2107 Wilson Blvd., Suite 300
Arlington, VA 2201
mfitzpatr...@nami.orgThis e-mail address is being protected from spam
bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
703-516-7977
----------- END LETTER -
US Senate Probe Discovers:
Most NAMI Money is From Psychiatric Drug Industry
by MindFreedom News
NAMI has admitted to a US Senate probe that a majority of their funds
over the last five years, 56 percent on average, have been from drug
corporations. NAMI has agreed with the probe to immediately begin
quarterly postings to their web site with a list of drug company
donations and amounts.
MindFreedom obtained a letter sent last week by NAMI executive
director Michael J. Fitzpatrick to "NAMI Leaders and Members." The
letter is a response to the probe of NAMI by US Senator Charles
Grassley (R-IA) initiated on 6 April 2009.
In the 28 April letter, copied below, Mr. Fitzpatrick wrote, "As
reported to Senator Grassley, pharmaceutical companies contributed an
average of 56% of national NAMI's budget annually for the period
2005-
2009."
Mr. Fitzpatrick passionately defends the drug company donations, but
says NAMI has a strategic plan to lower the percentage.
Commented MindFreedom director, David Oaks, "The NAMI board should
have listened to its own Consumer Council which voted for full
disclosure many years ago, but was ignored."
MindFreedom maintains a count of the number of times the NAMI web
site
uses the phrase "biologically based" when referring to mental health
problems. Said Oaks, "There are as many theories about the cause of
extreme mental problems as there are colors in the rainbow.
Unfortunately, NAMI's rainbow is mainly green -- drug company money
green. Now we know why."
MindFreedom is encouraging an international "thank you" from everyone
to Senator Grassley for investigating psychiatric drug money
corruption, click here:
http://grassley.senate.gov/contact.cfm
LISTEN and CALL-IN LIVE to a special free online MindFreedom web
radio
show this Saturday, 9 May 2009, about protesting psychiatric drug
company corruption. More info is available here: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/davidwoaks
To track the number of "biologically based" references on the
NAMI web site over the years click here:
http://tinyurl.com/nami-biologically-based
For a news report by Bloomberg from 6 April 2009 about the letter
by Sen. Grassley to NAMI click here:
http://tinyurl.com/grassley-to-nami
To thank Sen. Grassley for investigating NAMI funding click here:
http://grassley.senate.gov/contact.cfm
http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/576/36/
Culling the $$$ Evidence: National Alliance for Mental Illness
Saturday, 18 April 2009
Grassley's team has asked NAMI to disclose the specifics of its
funding so that people with mental illness and their families, as
well
as the public and healthcare officials, can see for themselves how
conflicted this advocacy group is.
Upon receipt of a letter from Sen. Chuck Grassley, requesting
disclosure of NAMI drug industry funding sources,
NAMI’s executive director, Michael Fitzpatrick, sent out notice to
NAMI supporters, stating: “NAMI does not engage in product promotion,
endorsement, licensure or certification of any product, service or
program owned by a corporate sponsor.”
However, as documented by Philip Dawdy (Furious Seasons ) that claim
is false: on December 21, 2006, in response to a press release put
out
by Johnson & Johnson promoting Invega, its replacement for its mega
profitable neuroleptic (antipsychotic) Risperdal, Fitzpatrick using
his title, “Executive Director, National Alliance on Mental Illness,”
joined J & J in praising the company's new drug:
“We are pleased that innovative delivery technologies are being
applied to new treatments for schizophrenia. New and efficacious
treatment options, like INVEGA, provide significant opportunities for
more people with schizophrenia to manage their disease as they work
with their treatment teams to live more fulfilling and productive
lives.”
Phil Dawdy commented in his blog: “Now, what the hell is the ED of
NAMI doing in a company press release much less mouthing the product
name in all-caps?”
The answer is to be found when Sen. Grassley lays bare NAMI's multi-
million $$$$$$$ intake from psychotropic drug manufacturers.
Alisson Bass , author of Side Effects, notes on her blog: "The fact
that NAMI is heavily dependent on drug company money is old news, but
Grassley's investigation, first reported in Bloomberg News, may shed
a
welcome spotlight on an lobbying organization that masquerades as
grassroots."
Evelyn Pringle lists some of the already reported $$$$$$$ from pharma
that bought NAMI support. She also reports that according to NAMI’s
2006 Tax Form 990, Michael Fitzpatrick, was paid a salary of $212,281
and another $10,090 in employee benefit contributions and deferred
compensation plans.
In her book, Side Effects, Alison Bass revealed that drug company
contributions have always been a substantial portion of NAMI's
revenues.
She reported that Jim McNulty, the president of NAMI from 2002 to
2004, failed to disclose that he was being paid thousands of dollars
from drug companies for promoting their products to NAMI members and
others at various speaking engagements.
“In a particularly intriguing twist,” she writes on her website blog,
“McNulty laundered this drug company money through a state chapter of
NAMI.” Bass further explains:
“This is how the scheme worked, according to McNulty himself and
others in the know. He would be paid thousands of dollars to speak
about the benefits of various antidepressants — McNulty himself
suffered from depression — and rather than pay him directly,
companies
such as Eli Lilly, the maker of Prozac, Pfizer, the maker of Zoloft,
and GlaxoSmithKline, which made Paxil, would give his speaking fees
to
the Rhode Island chapter of NAMI, which would then cut McNulty a
check.”
Bass reports, "When I asked McNulty why he was paid this way, he
said,
"Paperwork. It was simpler that way."
"McNulty, of course, never disclosed these conflicts to his
constituents or to the NIH (which appointed him to sit on influential
advisory boards that rendered opinions about the safety and efficacy
of the drugs he was being paid to promote)."
The drugs promoted by NAMI officials carry debilitating adverse
effects--including cardiac deaths, metabolic dysfunction, diabetes
and
hyperglycemia--constituting the most hazardous drugs in pharmacopoeia
prescribed for non-fatal conditions. Bass reports:
"NAMI continues to receive hefty contributions from the drug industry
but it no longer reveals the specific donors in its annual report,
published online.So Grassley's team has asked the organization to
disclose the specifics of its funding so that people with mental
illness and their families can see for themselves how conflicted this
advocacy group is. At FDA hearings over the years held to examine the
safety and effectiveness of antidepressants like Prozac and Paxil,
NAMI was always quick to come to the defense of these drugs. And NAMI
opposed the black box warnings the FDA required drug makers to put on
the labels of antidepressants in 2004 about their increased risk of
suicidal thoughts and behaviors. Now that Grassley's team is looking
into NAMI's books, perhaps the group's members -- people with mental
illness and their families -- will cast a more skeptical eye on its
credibility."
posted by Vera Hassner Sharav
http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/500/36/
Non-profit Fronts for Drug Industry_Boston Globe
Wednesday, 21 March 2007
These paid lobbying efforts on behalf of industry are carried out
under the pretext of advocacy in the public interest.
The Boston Globe reports that "little attention has been paid to
smaller nonprofits, especially patient groups that are largely funded
by the drug industry." Much as doctors are on the take, a lot of so-
called patient "advocacy" groups are pimping for the drug and medical
device industry.
The Globe describes one such industry front group, the Breast Cancer
Resource Committee, founded by Elzora K. Brown, a former staff
assistant to former US House Majority Leader Jim Wright. Brown
regularly testifies at public FDA advisory hearings, "packing an
emotional punch as advisers vote on controversial drug and device
approvals."
The Globe reports: From 1996 to 2004 , the years for which Internal
Revenue Service records are available, the Breast Cancer Resource
Committee raised about $3.4 million from mostly corporate donors,
including hundreds of thousands of dollars from such drug firms as
Amgen Inc. Pharmaceuticals LP , GlaxoSmithKline PLC, and Pfizer Inc.
"As her nonprofit's coffers swelled, Brown's salary jumped from
$40,100 to $162,500 --roughly one-third of every dollar raised.
During
that time, the group paid up to $2,600 a month for a four-story
Washington, D.C., townhouse, assessed at $788,510 , where Brown lived
and worked."
The stakes for drug companies are high. Breast cancer remedies
generate $35 billion in sales per year. And African-Americans are a
particularly deep market for any drug maker to court. Elzora Brown is
African-American.
A Mother Jones expose focused on the National Alliance for Mental
Illness (NAMI) which began cashing in on the industry promotion
"patient advocacy" charade early on. In 1999 Mother Jones reported
that 18 drug firms gave NAMI a total of $11.72 million between 1996
and mid-1999. These include Janssen ($2.08 million), Novartis ($1.87
million), Pfizer ($1.3 million), Abbott Laboratories ($1.24 million),
Wyeth-Ayerst Pharmaceuticals ($658,000), and Bristol-Myers Squibb
($613,505). See:
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/1999/11/nami.html
NAMI's leading donor is Eli Lilly and Company, maker of Prozac, which
gave $2.87 million during that period. In 1999 alone, Lilly will have
delivered $1.1 million in quarterly installments. "In the case of
Lilly, at least, "funding" takes more than one form. Jerry Radke, a
Lilly executive, is "on loan" to NAMI, working out of the
organization's headquarters.
Mother Jones reported that (then executive director of NAMI) Laurie
"Flynn explains the cozy-seeming arrangement by saying, "[Lilly] pays
his salary, but he does not report to them, and he is not involved in
meetings we have with [them]." She characterizes Radke's role at NAMI
as "strategic planning."
Of note, Flynn now heads TeenScreen, a controversial scheme that
falsely labels teen agers as mentally ill. TeenScreen is promoted as
a
suicide prevention tool without any evidence to back up that claim.
In
fact, TeenScreen is designed to increase the psychotropic drug
market--
the only certain beneficiaries are NAMI's industry benefactors: Eli
Lilly; Janssen; Pfizer; Novartis; Abbott; Weyth-Ayrs; Bristol-Mayers
Squibb; GlaxoSmithKline
Contact: Vera Hassner Sharav
http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2007/03/18/drug_firms_funding_of_advocates_often_escapes_government_scrutiny/
http://tinyurl.com/3cmn7y
The Boston Globe
Drug firms' funding of advocates often escapes government scrutiny
Many patient groups depend on it, raising tricky ethical questions
By Diedtra Henderson
March 18, 2007
WASHINGTON -- Elzora K. Brown could stand before a microphone and
calmly describe the swath of devastation that cancer has cut through
five generations of her family. Her great-grandmother, grandmother,
mother, three sisters, and three nieces had breast cancer . And, at
age 31 , Brown was diagnosed with the same kind of cancer.
"My own story is replicated in the lives of high-risk families across
the globe," Brown told an audience of Food and Drug Administration
advisers considering a controversial application to allow wider sales
of silicon gel breast implants, " families who every single day
quietly and patiently confront the ravages of breast cancer with far
more courage and fortitude than I could ever muster and with far
fewer
resources than I have at my own disposal."
Brown's message about the need to reduce disproportionately high
mortality rates among African-American women, like herself, resonated
whether she was testifying before the FDA, addressing the nation's
mayors, or speaking with members of Congress, where she was a staff
assistant to former US House Majority Leader Jim Wright.
What few in Brown's audiences knew is that the patient advocate
personally profited from her cancer-survival message, accepting
funding from major pharmaceutical companies that produce cancer
treatments, according to tax records.
Brown, 57 , wears a wig to conceal graying hair slowly growing back
after she successfully fended off a second cancer; last June she
underwent her final chemotherapy treatment for ovarian cancer.
Through
speaking engagements for the Breast Cancer Resource Committee, a
patient-advocacy group Brown founded in 1989 , she highlighted the
benefits of early cancer screening, offered a support group for
African-American women, and called attention to the need for
diversity
among participants in clinical trials for new treatments. The efforts
earned her dozens of awards, including one from the Washington, D.C.,
mayor for community service, and a presidential appointment to the
National Cancer Advisory Board .
Patient advocates like Brown regularly testify at FDA public
hearings,
packing an emotional punch as advisers vote on controversial drug and
device approvals.
Congress has homed in on examples of excessive compensation to
managers of some nonprofits that underwrite what Senator Charles E.
Grassley , Republican of Iowa , has derided as "champagne
lifestyles."
And others have targeted conflicts of interest that taint medical
research and creep into FDA advisory panels. But little attention has
been paid to smaller nonprofits, especially patient groups that are
largely funded by the drug industry.
Public Citizen's Peter Lurie , who testifies frequently before FDA
panels, noticed a shift as public hearings "were becoming
contaminated
by people who didn't represent the public in any way. They
represented
particular moneyed interests." Lurie, deputy director of the consumer
advocacy organization's health research group, said, "It's a fair
question: Who represents patients and how they come to call
themselves" patient representatives?
In 221 advisory committee meetings scrutinized, 32 of 44 speakers
representing patients said they had received funding from a company
that would be affected by the FDA's decision, according to a recent
journal article that Lurie co authored about conflicts of interest on
FDA advisory panels.
While the FDA scours its advisers' backgrounds for such information,
the agency does not require disclosures when patients testify.
Nor do drug makers highlight such ties.
"As a survivor, I want a healthy life after breast cancer, so the
long-
term side effects of treatment must figure into the treatment
decision," Brown said in a press release touting Ellence , a breast
cancer drug that showed lower heart risk. The release, distributed by
Pfizer Inc., did not disclose the funding that Brown's group received
that year from the drug giant.
Six-figure salary
From 1996 to 2004 , the years for which Internal Revenue Service
records are available, the Breast Cancer Resource Committee raised
about $3.4 million from mostly corporate donors, including hundreds
of
thousands of dollars from such drug firms as Amgen Inc.
Pharmaceuticals LP , GlaxoSmithKline PLC, and Pfizer Inc. As her
nonprofit's coffers swelled, Brown's salary jumped from $40,100 to
$162,500 --roughly one-third of every dollar raised. During that
time,
the group paid up to $2,600 a month for a four-story Washington,
D.C.,
townhouse, assessed at $788,510 , where Brown lived and worked. She
also made liberal use of the committee's American Express card for
"incidental, personal expenses," according to tax records, leaving
the
balance unpaid.
The nonprofit's accountant, James Dunn , of White Hall, Md .,
declined
to respond to questions about liens the IRS filed against Brown in
2003 , which allege she underpaid taxes by $179,257 from 1997 to
2002 .
An IRS spokesman said the agency cannot discuss the specifics of an
individual's tax lien, but no records have been filed indicating the
IRS has discharged the liens. In a brief telephone conversation this
week , Brown declined to comment except to say she has paid the tax
liens and has spent the funds she raised properly.
Last July, in a lengthy interview, she said questions about her
finances arose because of testimony she gave in support of breast
implants. Her comments to federal advisers raised the ire of a
"nasty,
contentious group of women" who disagreed with her views, Brown said.
She has declined requests to clarify her IRS reports, sent by fax and
overnight mail.
A Boston consultant who works exclusively with nonprofits, however,
said Brown's salary and her use of the Breast Cancer Resource
Committee's funds to pay her lease warrant scrutiny.
"In a vacuum, Elzora Brown's salary is, arguably, not outrageous,"
said Thomas A. McLaughlin , a consultant at Grant Thornton LLP and
author of "Streetsmart Financial Basics for Nonprofit Managers ,"
which coaches nonprofit leaders on how to read and use financial
data.
"What is far less defensible is the fact that she is paid nearly one-
third of every dollar that comes through the door."
Brown's highest salary was in 2002 , when she was paid $162,500 and
the organization raised $554,993 . Brown's salary would have ranked
her among the highest-paid chief executives for nonprofit advocacy
groups of that size, according to a 2005 compensation survey of 1,660
nonprofits. It compares with a median salary of $72,000 paid to chief
executives of nonprofit advocacy organizations with annual revenue
from $500,000 to $1 million , according to Abbott, Langer &
Associates
Inc. , a firm that conducts salary surveys.
In 2002 , Brown also was reimbursed $37,246 for expenses and tallied
$2,682 in personal charges on the committee's American Express card,
according to the IRS filing. By 2004 , that unpaid card balance was
$4,414 .
"It's looking like this is her own piggy bank," said Daniel
Borochoff , president of the American Institute of Philanthropy , a
charity watchdog based in Chicago . "You need to separate business
and
personal expenses; that's a pretty common principle."
Combined with her benefits and the pay she awarded her niece -- who
was the committee's lone paid employee that year -- the $264,746 in
spending in 2002 amounted to 47 percent of the Breast Cancer Resource
Committee's total revenue.
By contrast, the National Organization for Rare Disorders ,
generously
funded by such biotechnology companies as Biogen Idec Inc. , had
total
revenue of $7.6 million in 2004 . Its president, Abbey S. Meyers ,
was
paid $129,943 . The salary and benefits paid to Meyers and the
organization's four highest-paid employees accounted for about 5.2
percent of the group's spending.
`Wild West atmosphere'
By working out of an office in her basement, Brown nestled into a
regulatory black hole: Unlike attorneys general in other states, the
attorney general's office in Washington, D.C., has lacked authority
to
investigate nonprofits, although it will gain such power within three
months. Also, Brown's budget was too small to attract the attention
of
other regulators.
"It's a Wild West atmosphere," Borochoff, of the American Institute
of
Philanthropy , said of the oversight of small nonprofits in
Washington. "Basically, a group this size can get away with a lot."
Despite what nonprofit experts describe as questionable spending,
Brown's corporate backers defend their funding decisions.
AstraZeneca, which paid Brown's group at least $380,047 from 1999 to
2004 , said it remains a "proud" partner with the Breast Cancer
Resource Committee.
The committee "provides a valuable resource through its dedication to
reducing the incidence and mortality of breast cancer among African-
American women, particularly those who have little or no access to
adequate healthcare and treatment," Kirsten Evraire, a spokeswoman
for
AstraZeneca cancer therapies, said in a statement.
The stakes for drug companies are high. Breast cancer remedies
generate $35 billion in sales per year. And African-Americans are a
particularly deep market for any drug maker to court.
African-Americans suffer disproportionately higher rates of chronic
ailments, such as diabetes , with blacks nearly twice as likely as
whites to have that disease. Black men are nearly seven times as
likely as white men to be diagnosed with HIV , according to the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . And, when it comes to
cancer , African-Americans have the highest mortality rate of any
racial or ethnic group, according to the American Cancer Society ,
lowering life expectancy when compared with whites.
In return for their donations to patients' groups, drug companies are
able attach their names to causes that cancer patients are passionate
about, said Selma Schimmel , a three-time cancer survivor who heads a
nonprofit that produces a weekly radio show for cancer patients.
The nonprofits consider pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry
donations essential.
"When a company donates to us in support of a program that gives aid
directly to patients, it is a humanitarian gift, not a donation to
influence us," said Meyers , president of the National Organization
for Rare Disorders . "If companies stop supporting these programs, we
will not be able to help patients who could not otherwise afford
their
treatments."
Brown said the Breast Cancer Resource Committee has been on hiatus
since she moved to Oklahoma to be near her ailing mother.
But during its heyday, the committee's actions were typical of a
nonprofit -- mainly aimed at spreading the message as widely as
possible. For instance, in 2001 , the group co produced a one-hour
television special funded by the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer
Foundation , the world's largest grassroots network of breast cancer
survivors, highlighting innovative ways to reach African-American
women, including sending mammography vans to churches and dispatching
health workers to beauty salons.
The production, "A Celebration of Life: Rising Above Breast Cancer "
was broadcast on more than 200 public television stations when it
first aired.
Diedtra Henderson can be reached at dhenderson at globe.com
http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/488/36/
Fake Drug, Fake Illness--People Believe It
Friday, 16 February 2007
Direct to consumer drug advertisements are so successful, they can
convince people they're sick and need the advertised drug--
Below , Australian artist Justine Cooper created a marketing campaign
for a non-existent drug called Havidol (as in Have it All) for
Dysphoric Social Attention Consumption Deficit Anxiety Disorder
(DSACDAD), which she also invented.
"The thing that amazes me is that it has been folded into real Web
sites for panic and anxiety disorder. It's been folded into a Web
site
for depression. It's been folded into hundreds of art blogs."
Another hillarious parody, also from Australia, is a video describing
a new "epidemic":
Motivational Deficiency Disorder: "In its mild forms, persons can't
get off the beach...."
See video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoppJOtRLe4
That people are taken in by these parodies is a testament to how the
drug industry backed up by psychiatry have insinuated non-diseases
into the culture. However, nothing in the parodies compares with the
actual nonesense that serves as the diagnostic criteria in
psychiatry:
"Disruptive Behaviour Disorder is an expression used to describe a
set
of externalising negativistic behaviours that co-occur during
childhood; and which are referred to collectively in the Diagnostic
and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: Fourth Edition (DSM-IV)
as:
"Attention-Deficit and Disruptive Behaviour Disorders".
There are three subgroups of externalising behaviours:
Oppositional Defiant disorder (ODD);
Conduct Disorder (CD);
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
Oppositional Defiant disorder (ODD): often loses temper, often argues
with adults, often actively defies or refuses to comply with adults'
requests or rules, often deliberately annoys people, often blames
others for his or her mistakes or misbehaviour, is often touchy or
easily annoyed by others, is often angry and resentful, is often
spiteful or vindictive-
"A high level of co-morbidity (almost 95%) was found among 236 ADHD
children (aged 6-16 yrs) with conduct disorder, ODD and other related
categories (Bird, Gould, & Staghezza Jaramillo, 1994). In an 8 year
follow-up study, Barklay and colleagues (1990) found that 80% of the
children with ADHD were still hyperactive as adolescents and that 60%
of them had developed Oppositional Defiant or Conduct Disorder."
Logically that finding signifies that the "treatments" don't work!
In fact, it appears, children treated for ADHD developed an
additional
"disorder"
Contact: Vera Hassner Sharav
212-595-8974
verac...@ahrp.orgThis e-mail address is being protected from spam
bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070216/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_drug_fake
Fake drug, fake illness -- and people believe it!
Fri Feb 16,
A media exhibit featuring a campaign for a fake drug to treat a
fictitious illness is causing a stir because some people think the
illness is real.
Australian artist Justine Cooper created the marketing campaign for a
non-existent drug called Havidol for Dysphoric Social Attention
Consumption Deficit Anxiety Disorder (DSACDAD), which she also
invented.
But the multi-media exhibit at the Daneyal Mahmood Gallery in New
York, which includes a Web site, mock television and print
advertisements and billboards is so convincing people think it is
authentic.
"People have walked into the gallery and thought it was real,"
Mahmood
said in an interview.
"They didn't get the fact that this was a parody or satire."
But Mahmood said it really took off over the Internet. In the first
few days after the Web site (www.havidol.com) went up, it had 5,000
hits. The last time he checked it had reached a quarter of a million.
"The thing that amazes me is that it has been folded into real Web
sites for panic and anxiety disorder. It's been folded into a Web
site
for depression. It's been folded into hundreds of art blogs," he
added.
The parody is in response to the tactics used by the drug industry to
sell their wares to the public. Consumer advertising for prescription
medications, which are a staple of television advertising in the
United States, was legalised in the country in 1997. Cooper said she
intended the exhibit to be subtle.
"The drug ads themselves are sometimes so comedic. I couldn't be
outrageously spoofy so I really wanted it to be a more subtle kind of
parody that draws you in, makes you want this thing and then makes
you
wonder why you want it and maybe where you can get it," she added.
Mahmood said that in addition to generating interest among the artsy
crowd, doctors and medical students have been asking about the
exhibit. "I think people identify with the condition," he said.
Copyright © 2007 Reuters Limited.
Mega
Greegor <gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> US Senator Grassley ( R- IA ) finds that NAMI actually is a front
Flush.
Greegor
Greegor
news:05d1ec39-d870-4321...@k41g2000yqm.googlegroups.com:
Greg Scott Hanson is a pedophile. He only attached to Lisa to get to
her babay girl.
-- True story
Greegor
A bad forgery of me, attacking me, how amazing is that, Kent?
Which coward did it, Kent?
richard
Oooooooooohhh. Look who's calling who a coward. Like you're such a choir
boy you've never attacked kent or anyone? Oh yeah. Not this hour right?
Greegor
True or not, What would that have to do with sporgery and concealed
IP's?
Corinto
Greegor <gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.friends/msg/9911f4b9e0887bfa?hl=3Den&dmo=
> de=3Dsource
>
> On Feb 15, 4:07=A0pm, richard <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 21:08:59 -0800 (PST), Greegor wrote:
> >
> > > A bad forgery of me, attacking me, how amazing is that, Kent?
> >
> > > Which coward did it, Kent?
> >
> > Oooooooooohhh. Look who's calling who a coward. Like you're such a choir
> > boy you've never attacked kent or anyone? Oh yeah. Not this hour right?
>
> True or not, What would that have to do with sporgery and concealed
> IP's?
You assholes need to grow up.
♥Ari ♥
Anonymous
> Usenet assholes don't grow up they just widen their colons.
Then yours must just make a hollow "whooooooooooosh" when you fart.
Corinto
Dave U. Random
ROTFL!!
Anonymous
> Usenet assholes don't grow up they just widen their colons.
Then yours must just make a hollow "whooooooooooosh" when you fart.
Anonymous
Now THAT was funny.
*chuckle*
♥Ari ♥
Make sure you post it a third ime, AnonyMOUSIE. Once from school, once
from McDonald's, once from home.
*LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL*
*HEY LOOK OUT - ITS YOUR BOSS COMING TO YOUR BURGER STATION!!!*
Just kidding, God how I love to do that. *LOL*
Non scrivetemi
Sliverdick D. Barcodeboi wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:23:33 +0000 (UTC), Anonymous wrote:
>
>> Sliverdick D. Barcodeboi wrote:
>>
>>> Usenet assholes don't grow up they just widen their colons.
>>
>> Then yours must just make a hollow "whooooooooooosh" when you fart.
>
> Make sure you post it a third ime,
I was counting on you to do that. Again.
Oh, and uh... make sure I don't fluster you so badly you miss a key or
anything.
*smirk*
> AnonyMOUSIE. Once from school, once
> from McDonald's, once from home.
>
> *LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL*
>
> *HEY LOOK OUT - ITS YOUR BOSS COMING TO YOUR BURGER STATION!!!*
>
> Just kidding, God how I love to do that. *LOL*
Can't you come up with any new material?
Oh wait... nevermind.
♥Ari ♥
> ♥Ari ♥ wrote:
>
> Sliverdick D. Barcodeboi wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:23:33 +0000 (UTC), Anonymous wrote:
>>
>>> Sliverdick D. Barcodeboi wrote:
>>>
>>>> Usenet assholes don't grow up they just widen their colons.
>>>
>>> Then yours must just make a hollow "whooooooooooosh" when you fart.
>>
>> Make sure you post it a third ime,
>
> I was counting on you to do that. Again.
Well, there ya' go, AnonyMOUSIE, always count on Ari to show you your
ass.
*LOL*
--
http://tr.im/1fa6
George Orwell
> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:36:58 +0100 (CET), Non scrivetemi wrote:
>
>> ♥Ari ♥ wrote:
>>
>> Sliverdick D. Barcodeboi wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:23:33 +0000 (UTC), Anonymous wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sliverdick D. Barcodeboi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Usenet assholes don't grow up they just widen their colons.
>>>>
>>>> Then yours must just make a hollow "whooooooooooosh" when you fart.
>>>
>>> Make sure you post it a third ime,
>>
>> I was counting on you to do that. Again.
>
> Well, there ya' go, AnonyMOUSIE, always count on Ari to show you your
> ass.
So in your mind, you failing to be quite as immature as you were the last
time I spanked you is... "showing ass".
In context, that makes perfect sense.
*shrug*
Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it
♥Ari ♥
> ♥Ari ♥ wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:36:58 +0100 (CET), Non scrivetemi wrote:
>>
>>> ♥Ari ♥ wrote:
>>>
>>> Sliverdick D. Barcodeboi wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:23:33 +0000 (UTC), Anonymous wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Sliverdick D. Barcodeboi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Usenet assholes don't grow up they just widen their colons.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then yours must just make a hollow "whooooooooooosh" when you fart.
>>>>
>>>> Make sure you post it a third ime,
>>>
>>> I was counting on you to do that. Again.
>>
>> Well, there ya' go, AnonyMOUSIE, always count on Ari to show you your
>> ass.
>
> So in your mind, you failing to be quite as immature as you were the last
> time I spanked you is... "showing ass".
Heh, you're in good form today Mr. AnonyMOUSIE! Things were quiet out on
the streets in your *apartment* I suppose.
Me, I need to apologize, I've been cranky unseasonably cold weather
here. As low as 50F for two days in a row! No beach time...until
yesterday and boi did I take on a sunburn. lol
Not to mention, ok I will, my 430 sported a cracked exhaust header and
fukking Ferrari wouldn't replace under warranty. Everyone knows this is
a common problem so I showed them.
I forward-ordered a F458!
Having a bunch of money and all kinds of toys like boats n planes n
stuff, it's a PITA, Mr. AnonyMOUSIE. It's almost like work, something is
broken all the time!
So, again, apologies, maybe the weather will act sub-tropical again and
I will return in better demeanor.
lol
--
http://tr.im/1fa6
Anonymous Remailer (austria)
Sliverdick D. Barcodeboi sputtered:
<flush delusions>
Heard all your lies before Sliverdick. Got anything new?
Oh wait... nevermind.
*snicker*
♥Ari ♥
wrote:
> Got anything new?
Nothing but more bad news, I'm afraid. This will make your day, Mr.
AnonyMOUSIE.
I lost the condo assn presidency, yep, lost to a cretin who doesn't even
own a penthouse! Only in America.
Oh well, the Moraya is finished and my Buyer is ready to close so it's
off to Vanderbilt Beach next week!
--
http://tr.im/1fa6
Non scrivetemi
> I forward-ordered a F458!
Hey look everyone, our resident idio-troll's been spending some of his
useless life drooling over sports car eye candy on the Internet lately.
I just wonder which dozen or so abusive sock puppets the pathetic fuck
uses in the sports car related newsgroups....??
Anonymous Remailer (austria)
♥Ari ♥
> Ari wrote:
>
>> I forward-ordered a F458!
>
> Hey look everyone, our resident idio-troll's been spending some of his
> useless life drooling over sports car eye candy on the Internet lately.
Right you are, I drool, you take the bus, Mr. AnonyMousie! Won't get my
458 until mid to late in the year. :(
Good news though, Ferrari resolved the warranty on my F430 and is going
to replace the cracked header assembly for free!
Got to run, sunset on the beach tonight, weather is turning colder, all
the way down to 55 tomorrow night.
Brrrrrrrrrrrrr!
--
http://tr.im/1fa6
♥Ari ♥
wrote:
> I just wonder which dozen or so abusive sock puppets the pathetic fuck
> uses in the sports car related newsgroups....??
Why not join and find out?
www.ferrarichat.com
http://www.ferrarilife.com/forums/
--
http://tr.im/1fa6
Kent Wills
A poorly done sporgery at that.
And then you made it very clear that you made the posts. While I
can't actually KNOW why you did it, I can make a plausible guess.
You weren't being made the victim you NEED to be, so you attacked
yourself.
A select number of items that really are about Gregory Scott "Piggly
Wiggly" Hanson (either directly or through the same standards he
DEMANDS be held to others):
Title: ST VS GREGORY HANSON
(DOB 05/22/1959)
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 04/10/1996
Comments: CT 1 OWI 1ST
OTHER CITATION 04/10/1996
Comments: CT 2 SPEED
Disposition Status
GUILTY PLEA/DEFAULT
"That's the chick, but not the pic, zipperhead!"
Greg "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson proving his bigotry towards Asians, by
attacking my first wife (deceased).
http://www.rsdb.org/search?q=zipperhead
Me: "I suspect your stalking is due to the use and abuse of illegal
drugs, Greg. Is the reason for your stalking the members of
alt.friends due to the use and abuse of illegal drugs?
Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater and child abuser:
"Of course."
"My family's case is for Neglect, but we are treated
in virtually every regard as child abusers, marked on
the Child Abuse registry, for example."
-- Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson, wife beater and child
abuser
" ... But there ought to be conferences and studies on how to curb
minority overpopulation, repatriate minorities abroad, imprison more
minorities, increase use of the death penalty and divest minorities of
the power they have usurped over us in recent years. That would
address the most pressing problems of our day. ... "
April 2000, Gregory "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson
http://www.nationalist.org/ATW/2000/040101.html#Hanson
Path:
news.datemas.de!newsfeed.datemas.de!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!postnews.google.com!y21g2000yqn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Greegor <gree...@gmail.com>
Newsgroups:
misc.kids,alt.support.foster-parents,uk.people.parents,alt.support.child-protective-services
With the Christmas season upon us again, my stepdaughter was launching
into her usual tirade of "I need this" (Nintendo 64 games, Pokemon,
videos, Rhianna CD, etc.) After enduring a trip through Kmart, I
was at my wits end. I took the kid home and filled the bathtub with
water. Then I dunked the brat's head under the water and counted out
a full minute, with her flailing her arms. I brought her up and she
gasped for air. When she'd caught her breath, I asked her, "When you
were under that water, did you 'need' Nintendo? Pokemon? Rhianna?"
She shook her head. "What were you thinking about?" I
prodded. She told me "I was thinking that I needed air."
"Now you know the difference between 'need' and 'want'" I exclaimed
triumphantly.
--a true story
As of Monday, February 1, 2010:
Financials
Title: STATE OF IOWA VS HANSON, GREG SCOTT
Case: 06571 AGCR015216 (LINN)
Citation Number:
Summary Orig Paid Due
COSTS 9200.00 850.00 8350.00
FINE 500.00 500.00 0.00
SURCHARGE 150.00 150.00 0.00
RESTITUTION 0.00 0.00 0.00
OTHER 0.00 0.00 0.00
$9850.00 $1500.00 $8350.00
Yes, Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson still owes over
$8000.00 related to his convictions for BEATING his ex-wife.
Me: Hey, he used your standards.
Gregory Scott "Piggly Wiggly" Hanson: It's textbook psychopathic
reasoning.
Greg admitting his standards are psychopathic.
In MID
<2afdd85e-3b16-4829...@g27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
Greg writes, "I think Kent plays too many fantasy games
or watches too much fantasy TV." making it very clear he thinks
reality TV shows are fantasy.
Will Dockery
> A poorly done sporgery at that.
Thought I would share, this just in from my ex. Heh
Katherine Love, I'm a Corpse!
Roll away I've got to
Get away
From the pain that you smush into the cunt in me
The love we share
Seems to go nowhere
I've lost my lights
I toss and turn you won't let me sleep at night
Once I ran to you (I ran)
Now I'll run from you
This Katherine love you're given
I give you all a dead grrl could give you
Take my brittle bones and that's not nearly all
Katherine love, I'm a corpse!
Katherine love, I'm a corpse!
Now I know I've got to
Run away I've got to
Get away
You really want any more from me?
To make things right
You need someone to hold you tight
You think love is to spooge my corpse
But I'm sorry I don't fuck that way
Once I ran to you (I ran)
Now I'll run from you
This Katherine love you're given
I give you all a grrl could give you
Take my tears and that's not nearly all
Katherine love, I'm a corpse!
Katherine love, I'm a corpse!
*Don't touch me* please
I cannot stand the way you pea
I hate you though you hurt me so
Now I'm going to roll in my grave and so
Fuck off Will, Katherine love, I'm a corpse!
Katherine love, I'm a corpse!
Fuck off Dickery, Katherine love, I'm a corpse!
Katherine love, I'm a corpse!
Once I ran to you (I ran!!!)
With the kids and to my new boyfriend
This Katherine love you've given
I give you all a grrl could give you
Take my tears and that's not nearly all
Katherine love, I'm a corpse!
Katherine love, I'm a corpse!
Katherine love, I'm a corpse!
Katherine love
Ex Katherine Dockery Katherine Love, I'm a corpse!
--
"Blue Gummed Niggers & other bullshit" by Will Dockery:
http://www.myspace.com/gayincarolina
Mikey Lissack
FUCKING FREAK!! QUIT CROSSPOSTING YOUR BULLSHIT ALL OVER USENET
DICKERY!!!!!!
--
The asshole coward spineless worthless forger trolls have already been
kicked off several legitimate servers and only rogue servers including
Usenet4All, the ACSWFTs' only refuge.....I think <VVBG>.
Will Dockery
>
>> A poorly done sporgery at that.
Yes, and worth noting that the message posted here as by "Will Dockery" was
a forgery.
--
"Red Lipped Stranger & other stories" by Will Dockery:
http://www.myspace.com/willdockery
Tiger Would
> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 03:47:24 -0600, Kent Wills wrote:
>>
>>> A poorly done sporgery at that.
>
> Yes, and worth noting that any message posted here as by "Will Dockery" is
> a forgery.
WTF????
--
http://tr.im/1f9p
Will Dockery
in this thread (and probably others here) is a forger of "Will
Dockery", not the real one, me.
--
Poetry, music & video by Will Dockery:
http://www.youtube.com/user/WDockery
Corinto
Will Dockery <will.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Just a quick notice to state for the record that the person who posted
>
Flush.