What are the “outstanding research projects” which the NIMH has approved?
They include:
* A 19-year study of the affectionate, sexual and aggressive responses in monkeys, costing more than $1.6 million.
* A one-year study to determine why some transsexuals who apply for sex-change surgery follow through with it while others don’t. A bargain for only $7,236.
* A 25-year study of the effects of psychedelic hallucinogens on the brains of rats, at a cost of over $2.9 million.
* A 17-year study of slang terms used by Puerto Ricans in New York City when under stress. Cost: over $4.7 million.
* A six-year study of pigeons and humans to determine the response to delayed punishments or rewards when given a decision to make. Cost: more than $500,000.
* A five-year study in which rats were given electroshock treatment to compare its effect on their brains with the effects of drugs. Cost: more than $543,000.
* A four-year study in which drugged rats were startled by sounds and electric shocks to determine which drugs block the “fear mechanism.” Cost: over $300,000.
Bearing in mind that for every two studies approved, the NIMH rejects eight applications, one wonders what the remaining psychiatrists are attempting to “study.”
Continuing to defend the research expenditures at the appropriations hearing, Cowdry insisted that not all NIMH research involves animal experimentation.
Indeed, it does not.
According to Tom Schatz, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Council for Citizens Against Government Waste, “Taxpayers should be angered and appalled at some NIMH-funded research.”
Schatz cited a four-year, $1.3 million study conducted by the South Florida Mental Health Department in which known child sex-abusers were stimulated with pedophilic and other pornographic films and then allowed to move freely about the community, reporting to the researchers on their sexual activity. The research was conducted under strict confidentiality, barring the researchers from sharing any information about a subject’s potential crimes with anyone, including law enforcement officials.
In a paper produced the day before the appropriations hearing, the NIMH attempted to deny earlier criticisms of the Florida program by the Citizens Commission on Human Rights, which revealed that known child molesters were allowed to prey on children without law enforcement officials being notified.
The NIMH “fact sheet” denied that local children were put at risk, but went on to say that the sex offenders enrolled in the program were warned “that if they provided details linking to a specific sex crime, this would be reported to the authorities.”
The duplicity of this statement was revealed in the appropriations hearing when Congressman Istook read from a memo directed to staff of the Florida program. The memo instructed the staff: “Do not ask a client about the specifics of any illegal act, e.g., a victim’s name or address, description of victim, specific behaviors of a victim, statements by the victim or details of any act that could directly connect the client with a particular crime.”
The reason was obvious: If the NIMH researchers could not identify the victim, they would not have to report anything to the authorities.
The NIMH fact sheet stated that, “As far as can be determined, the project resulted in no additional risk to the children of the community.” (Emphasis added.)
In other words, 100 known child abusers, continually excited with pornographic material over a four-year period, were let loose into the community and “as far as the NIMH could determine” there was no added risk to innocent children and adults.
As Tom Schatz said, “No research goal, especially one with such dubious methodologies, can be justified when the lives of children are at stake. Innocent children should not serve as unsuspecting guinea pigs for government research. It’s time to part the veil of secrecy and esoteric semantics surrounding some of the NIMH grants and let the taxpayer know what kind of whacky, even sinister science-fair experiments they’re paying for. We want the NIMH on a very, very short leash.”
Rex Cowdry’s most candid statement came at the end of the appropriations hearing. After attempting to shake the serious questions in a blizzard of psychiatric mumbo-jumbo and completely unsubstantiated and unsubstantiatable claims about the “successes” of psychiatry, he said of “mental illness” in general, “We do not know the causes. We don’t have methods of ’curing’ these illnesses yet.”
Congress was on the right track when it started hearings to drastically cut NIMH funding, but didn’t go far enough. It is time to review the issue anew, and continue the process until all waste, abuse and criminality is slashed from the federal budget — and the NIMH exposed and dismantled as the sham it is.
| Your View | Related Sites | Bookstore | Church of Scientology Freedom Magazine|
|
|
|
