Alternative to Medication/Della Noche speaks from experience!

[Sir Arthur]

Alternative to Medication/Della Noche speaks from experience!

Re: Alternative to Medication/Della Noche speaks from experience!

Della Noche <***@mail.wco.com> wrote on 12/6/1995:

I think we may be running into a bit of a semantic problem here. Food
additives definitely precipitated behavior in my child that resembled
ADHD.

I am completely confused by the studies that "say" refined sugar
doesn't
affect the behavior of children. We could always tell 100% of the
time
when my oldest boy had eaten candy when he got home - checked with
other
parents as well as kids, plus he never lied about it when we asked.

I think you'll be forever trying to convince parents that what they
observe in their children isn't "really" true. The correlation in
most
kids I know is just too obvious.

As for studies - apparently the original Kaiser-Permante work in this
area is being pooh-poohed now but it sure helped us out.

DN
----------
Della Noche <***@mail.wco.com> wrote on 12/8/1995:

I know this thread was originally about ADD, kids, and meds. But if
so-called studies can't accurately describe the effects of sugar on
"normal" kids, how are we supposed to interpret the ones on ADD? I am
not
saying that sugar causes AD problems. I am saying that kids' behavior
is
generally affected by it. I believe that more children than not get
boosted up, cranked up, buzzed, whatever you want to call it by sugar
even though there have recently been studies (paid for by ?) that try
to
tell us this ain't so. Say what? Is this simply a problem with the
criteria for "affecting behavior" used in the studies?

As I said before - most parents go with what they know and what they
know
is what they've learned watching their own kids grow. That means most
of
us know better than to give kids Snickers to calm them down.

<Skipping Down>

I personally took Ritalin in 1968 and it had been on the market some
years before I took it! FDA approved and everything.

I worked with kids in a public elementary school who were being given
Ritalin for what was called hyperactivity in 1971 and 1972. There was
much concern among parents and teachers at that time (remember that's
when the Kaiser work with artificial colorings and flavorings came
out)and many were looking for alternatives then. I myself had to
watch a
10 year old trying to kick and it was hard for him.

No one seems to want to address the bladder control difficulties that
can
come with trying to get off Ritalin. Any suggestions?

So I don't know where you've gotten this "first studies 10 years ago"
nonsense. Look further back, kiddo. I prefer earlier studies because
they were more frank, more practical, less caught up in yuppie jargon
and
political correctness.
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
It has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the main culprit of
"ADD" is environmental, personal and social. Diet plays a huge role
into
causality of the variety of symptoms relating to ADD. In fact, the
sugar
substitute, NutraSweet, could cause long-term health problems that
dramatically increases the severity of ADD; but that is another story.

No doubt that teenagers these days do not eat healthy foods. In
general,
kids now consume 10 times the amount of sugar, fat and carbohydrates
that there bodies can function with normally. When mindless
television
watching is factored in, a definite conclusion can easily be reached
between ADD and the social environment.

Unfortunately, the cure is as bad as the disease. Instead of shutting
off the television, making sure that diet and exercise plays as great
a
role as writing and arithmetic, and installing no-nonsense discipline,
today's parents give to much leeway to our Corporate-Dominated
society.
Can anything be done? Yes, it should be done by those Parents who
need
to know that America has 10 times the amount of cases of misdiagnosed
ADD
as in Europe; and over 100 times compared to Japan. Also, the United
States consumes more Ritalin than the rest of world Combined!

Parents also are never told of the side-effects of Ritalin; which
consists of addiction, growth retardation and cancer.
Many psychiatrists agree that most cases of ADD do not need Ritalin
but good old-fashioned parenting; which includes a proper diet. But
it is time consuming and difficult, and too many doctors and parents
opt for the easier route of taking a pill.

It seems like as time goes on, from the end of 1996 into 1997 and
beyond 2008; the
cases of ADD seem to be increasing but also the counter-trend of
awareness
about this "spin-drome" is also on the upswing. Hopefully we will be
able to contact the many lost souls who come here on these newsgroups
for some honest and straight answers.

Thank you again Della! It has not been established that ADD does NOT,
I repeat does NOT exist. My own scientific medical research institute
has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that ADD and its pretend sister
ADHD are nothing but made-up phony spin-dromes. So stop taking drugs
that turn you into a zombie or worse: Proby or Frank, and start living
a good life. God Bless America and God Bless each and every one of
you except the pro-med Cult and shills! God damn those punks to hell
and back!!!

[Sir Arthur is a fraud]

Post by Sir Arthur
It has not been established that ADD does NOT

ADD is not your problem.

You need to address your own credibility, which is below zero.

You expressed interest in the private parts of other males who post
here. You posted an article asking for free pics of gay and anal sex.
You are a pervert.

You also impersonated a medical doctor named DR. RICHARD X. FRAGER.

You also altered a WASHINGTON POST article and passed it off online as
an original.

Your ISP's were notified by the Washington Post's original article
reporter/author, as they should have been been.

You got booted by your ISP's for fraudulently posing as a medical
doctor, as you should have been.

No amount of subterfuge by you will mitigate to any degree WHAT YOU
ALONE DID!

Now go shave off that ugly beard! The 1970's are long gone!

AND STOP SMOKING DOPE!!

[Sir Arthur]

On Aug 24, 10:49 am, "Sir Arthur is a fraud" <***@hotsmail.com>
wrote:

Alternative to Medication/Della Noche speaks from experience!

Re: Alternative to Medication/Della Noche speaks from experience!

Della Noche <***@mail.wco.com> wrote on 12/6/1995:

I think we may be running into a bit of a semantic problem here. Food
additives definitely precipitated behavior in my child that resembled
ADHD.

I am completely confused by the studies that "say" refined sugar
doesn't affect the behavior of children. We could always tell 100% of
the
time when my oldest boy had eaten candy when he got home - checked
with
other parents as well as kids, plus he never lied about it when we
asked.

I think you'll be forever trying to convince parents that what they
observe in their children isn't "really" true. The correlation in
most kids I know is just too obvious.

As for studies - apparently the original Kaiser-Permante work in this
area is being pooh-poohed now but it sure helped us out.

DN

[Sir Arthur is a fraud]

"Jerry Kolnick" <***@zzz.com> wrote in message news:4e1c4a3e-2ff3-455b-acdd-***@o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com...

Quit the spam, Jerry.

You are a fraud.

[Sir Arthur]

... spam

Alternative to Medication/Della Noche speaks from experience!

Re: Alternative to Medication/Della Noche speaks from experience!

Della Noche <***@mail.wco.com> wrote on 12/6/1995:

I think we may be running into a bit of a semantic problem here. Food
additives definitely precipitated behavior in my child that resembled
ADHD.

I am completely confused by the studies that "say" refined sugar
doesn't affect the behavior of children. We could always tell 100% of
the time when my oldest boy had eaten candy when he got home - checked
with other parents as well as kids, plus he never lied about it when
we
asked.

I think you'll be forever trying to convince parents that what they
observe in their children isn't "really" true. The correlation in
most kids I know is just too obvious.

As for studies - apparently the original Kaiser-Permante work in this
area is being pooh-poohed now but it sure helped us out.

[Sir Arthur is a fraud]

Jerry Kolnick <***@zzz.com> wrote in message news:3da13099-b0db-412f-a980-***@v1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...

more spam from the tard in Oregon

[Sir Arthur]

degenerate spammer...

This article PROVES everything that I have ever wrote, Jan Drew,
Linda and Ilena Rose has ever wrote, has been 100% accurate. In
addition, the Pro-Med Shills (Stan, Proby, Wright, Frank, Palmer etc)
have been shown to be nothing but useful idiots controlled by Big
Pharma.
= = = = = = =
Drug giants accused over doctors' perks
Free flights, meals and match tickets can damage patient care, say
critics

* Sarah Boseley and Rob Evans
* The Guardian,

Drug companies are spending millions of pounds every year on all-
expenses-paid trips to conferences around the world for doctors and
other hospital staff, in what critics say is a massive marketing
exercise dressed up as medical education.

The Guardian can reveal the scale of pharmaceutical company
sponsorship following an examination of the registers of gifts and
donations to doctors that all hospitals are required to keep. They
show considerable largesse - from drug companies regularly picking up
hefty bills for travel to international conferences in Europe, Asia
and America, to specialist nurses' salaries, and weekly sandwich
lunches for hospital staff training sessions.

All-expenses-paid trips to conferences in the US, Vietnam or Hungary
are a regular feature of the registers, costing the companies up to
£5,000 per doctor. Many of the declarations by doctors do not put a
price on the trip. The total amounts received by staff at individual
hospital trusts with complete registers are substantial - Sheffield's
staff received funding of more than £105,000 from pharmaceutical and
medical devices companies in the 12 months to last June.

Examples of the firms' hospitality include:

· Astra Zeneca paid £2,500 for a doctor at the Royal Bournemouth trust
and £1,500 for a doctor at Sheffield teaching hospital to attend a
cancer conference in Texas

· Sanofi-Aventis, the world's fourth biggest pharmaceutical company,
paid for doctors at the Countess of Chester trust to go to conferences
in Cape Town, New Orleans and Barcelona. At Gateshead trust, their
reps gave a breakfast for 30 staff "to discuss drugs for the treatment
of breast cancer". The trust's register records that "the donor was
seeking to secure business".

· Roche spent £2,000 for an oncology consultant at Addenbrooke's
hospital in Cambridge to go to a conference in May last year.

· GSK, the biggest British pharmaceutical company, paid £1,200 for a
consultant at Sheffield teaching hospital to attend the 11th
international congress of Parkinson's disease and movement disorders
in Turkey last June.

· Companies have also been taking hospital staff to top football and
rugby matches. Carillion, a public sector construction firm, spent
£180 taking a senior manager at Milton Keynes trust to lunch and then
a rugby match at Twickenham last August.

Most doctors deny that their reliance on drug company cash makes them
biased. The pharmaceutical companies argue that they are helping
doctors acquire further medical education by funding their trips to
conferences in foreign cities, but they refuse to reveal how much they
pay out.

However, the health select committee warned in a report in 2005 that
the industry's sponsorship of doctors and other medical staff had drug
promotion as its motive and could lead to unsafe prescribing of drugs
such as Vioxx, the arthritis drug which was found to cause heart
attacks.

Joe Collier, the recently retired professor of medicines policy at St
George's hospital, London, a former member of the Medicines Commission
and an adviser to the select committee, said: "Through its
orchestrated campaigns affecting all those involved in the use of
medicines, the pharmaceutical industry enormously influences what
patients are prescribed. On the whole these influences are detrimental
to best practice."

Payments to doctors are far from transparent. The Department of Health
requires NHS trusts to compile registers of their medical staff's and
directors' possible conflicts of interest and to make them available
to the public. Only a minority do so. The Guardian requested the
registers for 90 hospital trusts under freedom of information
legislation. Only around a quarter returned data that included the
names of the doctors and the sponsoring companies and the amounts of
money received. Some refused to give any information at all.

Collier said this was unacceptable. "Declarations of interest are a
key way to help break the pharmaceutical industry's stranglehold. It
is not a trivial issue. Public declarations by doctors are essential
if prescribing is to be sensible and appropriate and according to
patients' needs."

Consumers International (CI) said the lack of transparency was
unacceptable. "When a medical professional speaks on a health issue,
we assume that they are putting patients' interests first. If that
person has a conflict of interest because they or their organisation
are receiving funding from a drug company the least we should demand
is the right to know about it," said Justin Macmullan, head of
campaigns. "Pharmaceutical companies will tell you that what they are
funding is medical education. But our concern is that this is really
highly effective, well-targeted marketing. This throws any notion of
impartiality out of the window and jeopardises a doctor's ability to
make an informed, balanced decision about the most appropriate
treatments."

CI wants drug companies to declare how much they give to doctors.
"Countries such as the US and Australia have woken up to this issue
and are now requiring pharmaceutical companies to disclose their
funding of medical organisations and medical education. European
regulators have been sleeping on the job," he said.

Labour MP Paul Flynn described as "codswallop" the companies' claim
that their only intention was to help educate doctors. "It's not true.
It's part of a huge marketing budget. It's all about maximising their
profits, not helping people in life-threatening situations," he said.
"The influence of these companies is enormous."

Doctors who receive funding believe they are not influenced by it.
Robert Storey, a consultant cardiologist at Sheffield involved in drug
trials, took four trips to conferences in the year to June 2007
courtesy of Astra Zeneca at a total cost of £12,000. However, he
regards these as business trips because he is asked to disseminate
research findings and are funded from the R&D budget. More junior
doctors have their funding arranged through the drug rep and must fly
economy class under Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry
(ABPI) rules.

"If it is done through the local rep, who may expect some sort of
favour in exchange for that sponsorship, there is more stringent
regulation," said Dr Storey. "[Those doctors] are seeing reps on a
regular basis and although it is explicitly stated in the ABPI rules
that there shouldn't be any conflict or conditions [on the funding],
it probably does influence doctors' behaviour because they are unsure
whether they will get further sponsorship for going to further
meetings, so it is useful to them to engender good relationships with
different reps.

"One has to be careful how one judges oneself, but when you get to my
level where you are getting a lot of interest from different
companies, you can pick and choose to a certain extent. If you feel
uncomfortable about any particular request or association, you can
very easily walk away. If I'm asked to put certain points across in a
talk which I think are biased, I won't do it in the best interests of
patient care."

Storey, who makes a fuller declaration than most doctors, would prefer
to see a different system. "I certainly think it would be preferable
if sponsorship or money for travelling to meetings was independent
from the pharmaceutical companies but there is no pot of money for
providing that," he said.

Dr Willy Notcutt, an expert in pain relief at James Paget hospital in
Great Yarmouth, has recently returned from a big conference in
Glasgow. Two companies, Eli Lilly and Boehringer, paid £800 for his
travel, accommodation and registration fee. He says he has been
prescribing a drug sold jointly by the two companies but was not
"brainwashed" into it by their hospitality. He made his own
independent evaluation of the merits of the drug. "I don't give a toss
what the drug company rep says. I prescribe drugs which give benefit
to my patients," he said.

The ABPI said doctors would not be able to attend conferences where
they hear from experts in their field without sponsorship, but it was
important this was transparent.

[Sir Arthur]

more spam...

Alternative to Medication/Della Noche speaks from experience!

Re: Alternative to Medication/Della Noche speaks from experience!

Della Noche <***@mail.wco.com> wrote on 12/6/1995:

I think we may be running into a bit of a semantic problem here. Food
additives definitely precipitated behavior in my child that resembled
ADHD.

I am completely confused by the studies that "say" refined sugar
doesn't affect the behavior of children. We could always tell 100% of
the time when my oldest boy had eaten candy when he got home - checked
with
other parents as well as kids, plus he never lied about it when we
asked.

I think you'll be forever trying to convince parents that what they
observe in their children isn't "really" true. The correlation in
most kids I know is just too obvious.

As for studies - apparently the original Kaiser-Permante work in this
area is being pooh-poohed now but it sure helped us out.

DN
----------
Della Noche <***@mail.wco.com> wrote on 12/8/1995:

I know this thread was originally about ADD, kids, and meds. But if
so-called studies can't accurately describe the effects of sugar on
"normal" kids, how are we supposed to interpret the ones on ADD? I am
not saying that sugar causes AD problems. I am saying that kids'
behavior is generally affected by it. I believe that more children
than not get boosted up, cranked up, buzzed, whatever you want to call
it by sugar even though there have recently been studies (paid for
by ?) that try to tell us this ain't so. Say what? Is this simply a
problem with the criteria for "affecting behavior" used in the
studies?

As I said before - most parents go with what they know and what they
know is what they've learned watching their own kids grow. That means
most of us know better than to give kids Snickers to calm them down.

<Skipping Down>

I personally took Ritalin in 1968 and it had been on the market some
years before I took it! FDA approved and everything.

I worked with kids in a public elementary school who were being given
Ritalin for what was called hyperactivity in 1971 and 1972. There was
much concern among parents and teachers at that time (remember that's
when the Kaiser work with artificial colorings and flavorings came
out) and many were looking for alternatives then. I myself had to
watch a 10 year old trying to kick and it was hard for him.

No one seems to want to address the bladder control difficulties that
can come with trying to get off Ritalin. Any suggestions?

So I don't know where you've gotten this "first studies 10 years ago"
nonsense. Look further back, kiddo. I prefer earlier studies because
they were more frank, more practical, less caught up in yuppie jargon
and political correctness.
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
It has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the main culprit of
"ADD" is environmental, personal and social. Diet plays a huge role
into causality of the variety of symptoms relating to ADD. In fact,
the sugar substitute, NutraSweet, could cause long-term health
problems that dramatically increases the severity of ADD; but that is
another story.

No doubt that teenagers these days do not eat healthy foods. In
general, kids now consume 10 times the amount of sugar, fat and
carbohydrates that there bodies can function with normally. When
mindless television watching is factored in, a definite conclusion can
easily be reached between ADD and the social environment. The chem-
trail black-budget program that is now 12 years old also plays a huge
part in these illnesses.

Unfortunately, the cure is as bad as the disease. Instead of shutting
off the television, making sure that diet and exercise plays as great
a role as writing and arithmetic, and installing no-nonsense
discipline, today's parents give to much leeway to our Corporate-
Dominated society. Can anything be done? Yes, it should be done by
those Parents who need to know that America has 10 times the amount of
cases of misdiagnosed ADD as in Europe; and over 100 times compared to
Japan. Also, the United States consumes more Ritalin than the rest of
world Combined!

Parents also are never told of the side-effects of Ritalin; which
consists of addiction, growth retardation and cancer. Many
psychiatrists agree that most cases of ADD do not need Ritalin but
good old-fashioned parenting; which includes a proper diet. But it is
time consuming and difficult, and too many doctors and parents opt for
the easier route of taking a pill.

It seems like as time goes on, from the end of 1996 into 1997 and
beyond 2008; the cases of ADD seem to be increasing but also the
counter-trend of awareness about this "spin-drome" is also on the
upswing. Hopefully we will be able to contact the many lost souls who
come here on these newsgroups for some honest and straight answers.

Thank you again Della! It has not been established that ADD does NOT,
I repeat does NOT exist. My own scientific medical research institute
has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that ADD and its pretend sister
ADHD are nothing but made-up phony spin-dromes. So stop taking drugs
that turn you into a zombie or worse: Proby or Frank, and start living
a good life. God Bless America and God Bless each and every one of
you except the pro-med Cult and shills! God damn those punks to hell
and back!!!

[Frank]

more spam...

Thank you again Della! It has not been established that ADD does NOT,
I repeat does NOT exist. My own scientific medical research institute
has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that ADD and its pretend sister
ADHD are nothing but made-up phony spin-dromes. So stop taking drugs
that turn you into a zombie or worse: Proby or Frank, and start living
a good life. God Bless America and God Bless each and every one of
you except the pro-med Cult and shills! God damn those punks to hell
and back!!!
=================================================
Liar, Your own SMRI? What a phony, you live in a small house in
Vancouver and there is no such center within several hundred miles.

Bad language, freako, very bad. What a freaking hypocrite, just like
your mentor Jam.

[Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A.]

Liar,...

We know you are, Frank, we know!

more spam...

Alternative to Medication/Della Noche speaks from experience!

Re: Alternative to Medication/Della Noche speaks from experience!

Della Noche <***@mail.wco.com> wrote on 12/6/1995:

I think we may be running into a bit of a semantic problem here. Food
additives definitely precipitated behavior in my child that resembled
ADHD.

I am completely confused by the studies that "say" refined sugar
doesn't affect the behavior of children. We could always tell 100% of
the time when my oldest boy had eaten candy when he got home - checked
with other parents as well as kids, plus he never lied about it when
we asked.

I think you'll be forever trying to convince parents that what they
observe in their children isn't "really" true. The correlation in
most kids I know is just too obvious. As for studies - apparently the
original Kaiser-Permante work in this
area is being pooh-poohed now but it sure helped us out.

DN
----------
Della Noche <***@mail.wco.com> wrote on 12/8/1995:

I know this thread was originally about ADD, kids, and meds. But if
so-called studies can't accurately describe the effects of sugar on
"normal" kids, how are we supposed to interpret the ones on ADD? I am
not saying that sugar causes AD problems. I am saying that kids'
behavior is generally affected by it. I believe that more children
than not get boosted up, cranked up, buzzed, whatever you want to call
it by sugar even though there have recently been studies (paid for
by ?) that try to tell us this ain't so. Say what? Is this simply a
problem with the criteria for "affecting behavior" used in the
studies?

As I said before - most parents go with what they know and what they
know is what they've learned watching their own kids grow. That means
most of us know better than to give kids Snickers to calm them down.

<Skipping Down>

I personally took Ritalin in 1968 and it had been on the market some
years before I took it! FDA approved and everything.

I worked with kids in a public elementary school who were being given
Ritalin for what was called hyperactivity in 1971 and 1972. There was
much concern among parents and teachers at that time (remember that's
when the Kaiser work with artificial colorings and flavorings came
out) and many were looking for alternatives then. I myself had to
watch a 10 year old trying to kick and it was hard for him.

No one seems to want to address the bladder control difficulties that
can come with trying to get off Ritalin. Any suggestions?

So I don't know where you've gotten this "first studies 10 years ago"
nonsense. Look further back, kiddo. I prefer earlier studies because
they were more frank, more practical, less caught up in yuppie jargon
and political correctness.
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
It has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the main culprit of
"ADD" is environmental, personal and social. Diet plays a huge role
into causality of the variety of symptoms relating to ADD. In fact,
the sugar substitute, NutraSweet, could cause long-term health
problems that dramatically increases the severity of ADD; but that is
another story.

No doubt that teenagers these days do not eat healthy foods. In
general, kids now consume 10 times the amount of sugar, fat and
carbohydrates that there bodies can function with normally. When
mindless television watching is factored in, a definite conclusion can
easily be reached between ADD and the social environment. The chem-
trail black-budget program that is now 12 years old also plays a huge
part in these illnesses.

Unfortunately, the cure is as bad as the disease. Instead of shutting
off the television, making sure that diet and exercise plays as great
a role as writing and arithmetic, and installing no-nonsense
discipline, today's parents give to much leeway to our Corporate-
Dominated society. Can anything be done? Yes, it should be done by
those Parents who need to know that America has 10 times the amount of
cases of misdiagnosed ADD as in Europe; and over 100 times compared to
Japan. Also, the United States consumes more Ritalin than the rest of
world Combined!

Parents also are never told of the side-effects of Ritalin; which
consists of addiction, growth retardation and cancer. Many
psychiatrists agree that most cases of ADD do not need Ritalin but
good old-fashioned parenting; which includes a proper diet. But it is
time consuming and difficult, and too many doctors and parents opt for
the easier route of taking a pill.

It seems like as time goes on, from the end of 1996 into 1997 and
beyond 2008; the cases of ADD seem to be increasing but also the
counter-trend of awareness about this "spin-drome" is also on the
upswing. Hopefully we will be able to contact the many lost souls who
come here on these newsgroups for some honest and straight answers.

Thank you again Della! It has not been established that ADD does NOT,
I repeat does NOT exist. My own scientific medical research institute
has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that ADD and its pretend sister
ADHD are nothing but made-up phony spin-dromes. So stop taking drugs
that turn you into a zombie or worse: Proby or Frank, and start living
a good life. God Bless America and God Bless each and every one of
you except the pro-med Cult and shills! God damn those punks to hell
and back!!! Frank, by his own admission, has no "life" other than
these newsgroups. So so sad, but his mentor Proby has
gave him his marching orders.

[Frank]

Post by Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A.

Liar,...

We know you are,

WE? As in we the queer, Malaysian boy lover, and we the closeted queer?

[Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A.]

... a meth lab...

Just say no Frank, drugs have destroyed most of your brain already!

Alternative to Medication/Della Noche speaks from experience!

Re: Alternative to Medication/Della Noche speaks from experience!

Della Noche <***@mail.wco.com> wrote on 12/6/1995:

I think we may be running into a bit of a semantic problem here. Food
additives definitely precipitated behavior in my child that resembled
ADHD.

I am completely confused by the studies that "say" refined sugar
doesn't affect the behavior of children. We could always tell 100% of
the time when my oldest boy had eaten candy when he got home - checked
with other parents as well as kids, plus he never lied about it when
we asked.

I think you'll be forever trying to convince parents that what they
observe in their children isn't "really" true. The correlation in
most kids I know is just too obvious. As for studies - apparently the
original Kaiser-Permante work in this
area is being pooh-poohed now but it sure helped us out.

DN
----------
Della Noche <***@mail.wco.com> wrote on 12/8/1995:

I know this thread was originally about ADD, kids, and meds. But if
so-called studies can't accurately describe the effects of sugar on
"normal" kids, how are we supposed to interpret the ones on ADD? I am
not saying that sugar causes AD problems. I am saying that kids'
behavior is generally affected by it. I believe that more children
than not get boosted up, cranked up, buzzed, whatever you want to call
it by sugar even though there have recently been studies (paid for
by ?) that try to tell us this ain't so. Say what? Is this simply a
problem with the criteria for "affecting behavior" used in the
studies?

As I said before - most parents go with what they know and what they
know is what they've learned watching their own kids grow. That means
most of us know better than to give kids Snickers to calm them down.

<Skipping Down>

I personally took Ritalin in 1968 and it had been on the market some
years before I took it! FDA approved and everything.

I worked with kids in a public elementary school who were being given
Ritalin for what was called hyperactivity in 1971 and 1972. There was
much concern among parents and teachers at that time (remember that's
when the Kaiser work with artificial colorings and flavorings came
out) and many were looking for alternatives then. I myself had to
watch a 10 year old trying to kick and it was hard for him.

No one seems to want to address the bladder control difficulties that
can come with trying to get off Ritalin. Any suggestions?

So I don't know where you've gotten this "first studies 10 years ago"
nonsense. Look further back, kiddo. I prefer earlier studies because
they were more frank, more practical, less caught up in yuppie jargon
and political correctness.
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
It has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the main culprit of
"ADD" is environmental, personal and social. Diet plays a huge role
into causality of the variety of symptoms relating to ADD. In fact,
the sugar substitute, NutraSweet, could cause long-term health
problems that dramatically increases the severity of ADD; but that is
another story.

No doubt that teenagers these days do not eat healthy foods. In
general, kids now consume 10 times the amount of sugar, fat and
carbohydrates that there bodies can function with normally. When
mindless television watching is factored in, a definite conclusion can
easily be reached between ADD and the social environment. The chem-
trail black-budget program that is now 12 years old also plays a huge
part in these illnesses.

Unfortunately, the cure is as bad as the disease. Instead of shutting
off the television, making sure that diet and exercise plays as great
a role as writing and arithmetic, and installing no-nonsense
discipline, today's parents give to much leeway to our Corporate-
Dominated society. Can anything be done? Yes, it should be done by
those Parents who need to know that America has 10 times the amount of
cases of misdiagnosed ADD as in Europe; and over 100 times compared to
Japan. Also, the United States consumes more Ritalin than the rest of
world Combined!

Parents also are never told of the side-effects of Ritalin; which
consists of addiction, growth retardation and cancer. Many
psychiatrists agree that most cases of ADD do not need Ritalin but
good old-fashioned parenting; which includes a proper diet. But it is
time consuming and difficult, and too many doctors and parents opt for
the easier route of taking a pill.

It seems like as time goes on, from the end of 1996 into 1997 and
beyond 2008; the cases of ADD seem to be increasing but also the
counter-trend of awareness about this "spin-drome" is also on the
upswing. Hopefully we will be able to contact the many lost souls who
come here on these newsgroups for some honest and straight answers.

Thank you again Della! It has not been established that ADD does NOT,
I repeat does NOT exist. My own scientific medical research institute
has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that ADD and its pretend sister
ADHD are nothing but made-up phony spin-dromes. So stop taking drugs
that turn you into a zombie or worse: Proby or Frank, and start living
a good life. God Bless America and God Bless each and every one of
you except the pro-med Cult and shills! God damn those punks to hell
and back!!! Frank, by his own admission, has no "life" other than
these newsgroups. So so sad, but his mentor Proby has
gave him his marching orders.