O’Neill, O’Neill and Frontiers Psychiatry

October, 12, 2020 | 11 Comments


  1. Leonora O -could make dealing with this issue her major life achievement if only she would engage. All the honours and lectures would pale into insignificance if she would engage with the real world outside academia She has written extensively about trust, noting
    “that people often choose to rely on the very people whom they claimed not to trust” and suggesting that we “need to free professionals and the public service to serve the public…to work towards more intelligent forms of accountability…[and] to rethink a media culture in which spreading suspicion has become a routine activity”.[4]
    I think her statement is flawed = ‘people dont choose to rely ….on those they claimed not to trust ‘- there is no real choice when the evidence is not available- or deliberately withheld ,there is no choice if a med ic withholds information or is not empowered to inform or afraid to challenge the hierachy or they tell blatant lies .
    DH has attempted to request her assistance He is as she says is needed – one of the professionals who has freed himself to serve the public , to empower citizens and challenge the media; If L O simply ignores the e mail her lectures become mere empty words blowing in the wind of lecture halls and ignoring the corruption which is killing so many innocent people.

    She seems the ideal candidate to take this on – but I don’t trust her to put her words into action. sadly this will be another seemingly decent person who turns out be be untrustworthy when it comes to putting her words into action. (Apologies if it turns out she does respond or there is some reason why she could not ).

    Should she be sent a copy of the blatant lie published in the Times where the coll of psychs doctored the warnings about anti depressants. Stuff of yet another lecture/book on trust, autonomy, trustworthiness ….https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onora_O%27Neill

    • I too wish that Onora O’Neill might engage with this greatly needed, and timely opportunity; and then address the urgent need to restore trust and transparency to those who may still be afforded the opportunity to avoid AD induced akathisia and its sequelae.

      Just as the current ‘Second Wave’ of Covid-19 appeared inevitable, I fear a secondary epidemic of SSRI/SNRI/AD prescribing directed towards those vulnerable young men and women confined in our University Halls of Residence.

      What will the “Experts” suggest to be the cause of clusters of ‘suicides’ amongst this vulnerable group?

      Will it be ‘Copycat Suicidal Ideation’, or Covid-19 induced Collateral Damage?
      We cannot expect any coroner to identify the real cause; or to ensure that inappropriate verdicts of suicide do not conclude predictable, future inquests.

      What about those who are spared from or survive initial akathisia, and succumb to Taking-of Life-By-Self’ after years of enduring PSSD?
      Suicidalty now potentially resulting from SSRI withdrawal syndromes.

      How well will those survivors fair in their future careers when their akathisia has been misdiagnosed as Serious Mental Illness and after they have been inappropriately detained, forcibly drugged, subject to the inevitable cruelty, despair and societal rejection induced by serial misdiagnosis and cascade iatrogenesis?

      ‘M.H.’ misdiagnoses are not compelling C.V. material.

      She does indeed seem to be the ideal candidate to take this on.

      For those of us who have seen the devastation caused by unrecognised akathisia, it would afford some comfort.

      • These associations might instead have paid closer attention to the concerned… aye Tim

        To the authors, as to many researchers, patient advocates, and survivors of psychiatric drugs, these recurring symptoms began to look increasingly like a drug-related syndrome—a problem due largely or entirely to the drug prescribed, with little or no relation to the condition it was supposed to treat.

        How Academic Psychiatry Minimized SSRI Withdrawal

        Key evidence was ignored and the condition itself was renamed.


        Christopher Lane, PhD

        Just as significant, the researchers were instrumental in renaming antidepressant withdrawal as “discontinuation syndrome,” a term the drug companies favored because it implied treatment had ended too soon and needed to be resumed, either at a higher dose or on a different drug.


        The 7-14 day time-frame for “discontinuation” would be repeated almost unchallenged for more than two decades, including by professional associations such as the UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Royal College of Psychiatrists, and the American Psychiatric Association, which has yet to update its prescribing guidelines.

        It would also be used (including by those same professional bodies) as a way to minimize or outright deny the existence of longer-term withdrawal, which was subsequently found to last months, often years.

        ‘Now GlaxoSmithKline, the drug maker acknowledges in these pages that Paxil/Seroxat causes serious, widespread side effects and withdrawal symptoms’ —


        In my next post on this topic, we’ll see how these far-reaching problems of misdiagnosis and misattribution became too overwhelming to ignore, forcing greater consideration of protracted withdrawal or post-acute withdrawal syndrome (PAWS) as part of an evidence-base academic psychiatry has for decades claimed to uphold and revere as one of its guiding principles.

    • Simon Wessely

      Strong piece from


      on why the next stage of pandemic may create more mental health issues in NHS staff than before. The book at the end is pretty good too.



      These raise the risk of developing psychiatric disorders, especially depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) – all of which are associated with increased suicide risk. Mental health problems will be experienced by the general population, but

      “moral injury”


      It’s a military term relating to the harm done to a person’s moral compass when they witness and fail to prevent an act that transgresses their ethical codes of conduct.

      This pair of Dames really need to pull-the-plug under their overlapping of self-interests with a ping of elastic bands…

  2. Onora is bang on the money, with ‘Trustworthiness’ and how so many are backing the wrong horse…

    TRUST – Samizdat Style

    Psychiatrist uses reverse psychology


    Onora O’Neill

    What we don’t understand about trust


    from Scotland


    Wendy Burn 
    Safe outdoor lobster lunch by the water at #LochlevenSeafoodCafe.

    “Think you can get your head out of the clouds and crank out a lobster bake for me?
    Like, right after this story on the bone pill?” – Malcharist

  3. The problem as I see it is that we have no proof that these people ACTUALLY RECEIVE the correspondence that we send them. Is it sometimes turned aside by an overzealous secretary?
    Recently I have contacted almost a dozen people or groups – people that I would have expected, at the very least, to acknowledge receipt of the email/ text/ letter sent. In each, I provided those three means of contact, yet NOT ONE REPLY has been received. In some I was quite plain in my request whilst in others I dressed my enquiry up a bit, wondering if that would earn a little recognition. Communicating these days is so much easier than it used to be therefore there is no excuse for this bad behaviour.
    The worst case was the inability to even access any contact details whatsoever without first paying a fee – I thought that was quite outrageous. I wonder if the “celeb” concerned realises that he is impossible to contact without us paying this money up front?
    It would seem to me that replying to a question or suggestion has gone out of fashion – that being “famous” equals having nothing to do with the “ordinary ” people of the land.
    If they fail to reply to David then what chance do we have ? – none whatsoever but that doesn’t mean that we give up trying. Giving up would let them get away with it all.
    David, good for you for calling out those who fail to reply to your correspondence. So very many of us are thankful that YOU do not behave in the same way – you treat all who contact you with that same sense of urgency, which leaves us dumbfounded as to how you find time for it all.
    Since you manage it, there is no reason for any of these others to fail. Maybe it’s time they looked into their mailboxes personally every now and again.

  4. What a world this could be if reasonable people responded reasonably to other well-intentioned individuals. We all likely have instances where we have been surprised or perhaps not quite surprised (but still disappointed) when a communication has gone unanswered. A few at least have the decency of giving an auto reply to let people know they will not likely respond. You never know the person’s intentions or what they might be contending with, but much gratitude to those who are able and do respond.

  5. It’s full of loopholes doctors and their solicitors can crawl through – such as how is the consent to be documented -signed and shared? if there is a disagreement about what was consented – guess who wins (I haven’t read the whole thing yet).

    the Guidance on professional standards and ethics for doctors (1 of 44 pages)
    Decision making
    and consent
    General Medical Council gmc-uk.org 01

    The duties of a doctor registered with
    the General Medical Council
    Patients must be able to trust doctors with their lives and health. To justify that trust
    you must show respect for human life and make sure your practice meets the standards
    expected of you in four domains.

  6. More on Pubic Trust

    More on Public Trust and Conflict of Interest

    NIMH: Director’s Blog

    Posted by Thomas Insel

    de-barred? not a bad idea …


    Here‘s a descriptive report about that office. It would seem to me that if Dr. Nemeroff is going to call the question himself by doing an end around and changing schools, a full investigation of him by the Office of Research Integrity should be almost automatic. People say that the NIMH leaves oversight up to the Granted Institutions. Well, in this case, the Institution has already acted – Emory banned him. Shouldn’t that be enough to get the Office of Research Integrity involved to protect the NIMH, other Institutions, and our patients from his further shenanigans? 

    If the Office of Research Integrity is what it’s name says it is, we don’t need new guidelines for this case. They’re already in place…

    who is not telling the truth? yes…


    The things that finally brought him down had to do with his relationship with GlaxoSmithKlein [GSK]. Nemeroff was directing a large NIMH study of GSK’s products while being on the company’s payroll – a big no-no. Additionally, he failed to disclose his own financial gain to Emory, even after being counseled to do so – a double no-no. As a result, he found himself the object of a Senate Investigation and was asked to step down as Chairman. His defense was that he “didn’t know the rules.”

    It was touted as an COI [conflict of interest] problem, but it was more that. It was a case of a pharmaceutical company hiring an academic department to push their products. It appears that the company actually ghost-wrote some of the papers published under Dr. Nemeroff and other colleagues names. Further, they recommended use of a drug in pregnancy that seems to be associated with birth defects. It wasn’t just a slip-up, it looks like it was a scam to me.

    Somebody is not telling the truth – maybe several somebodies.

    Who is not telling the truth?

  7. Magnum Global Ventures was set up to look after and manage the assets of the famous Magnum Photos according to Nicole Junkermann’s wiki . Magnum Photos as far as I’m aware is controlled by it’s members who are noted and famous photographers known for shedding light on pressing issues in the world. I wonder if they know about Study 329, ghost writing and major corruption ?



    “In November 2018, Junkermann was appointed to the Department of Health and Social Care’s Healthtech Advisory Board.[16][17] The board guides the Secretary of State on the potential of technology in health and social care”


    Services include:

    Clinical Trial Planning

    Clinical Trial Budgeting

    Clinical Trial Project Management

    Clinical Trial Risk Management

    Clinical Data Management

    Market Research for Target Geography

    Medical Writing

Leave a Reply