CCHR Says Despite Record-High Spending, Mental Health Outcomes Decline-Experts Say Fault Lies with Flawed Diagnostic System
Suicide rates are rising, psychiatric hospitalizations are increasing, and more Americans than ever are on psychiatric drugs. A growing number of experts and watchdog organizations argue that the root of the problem lies not in a lack of access or funding, but in the very foundation of modern psychiatry: an unscientific diagnostic system that pathologizes normal life. According to neurologist Dr. Suzanne O'Sullivan, author of ' The Age of Diagnosis,' 'fad' diagnoses pathologize the human condition itself. 'We are not getting sicker,' she writes, 'we are attributing more to sickness.'[1]
Despite massive investments in mental health care, U.S. outcomes are deteriorating:
Mental health/behavioral spending reached $329 billion in 2022—a 94% increase since 2012 [2]—yet suicide rates have jumped 30% since 2000.[3]
Time in a psychiatric hospital raises suicide likelihood by over 44 times; psychotropic drugs alone can raise it nearly six times.[4]
One-third of admitted psychiatric patients are readmitted within a year, highlighting treatment failure.[5]
Involuntary commitment accounts for over half of all psychiatric admissions.[6] Yet evidence shows that forced treatment is ineffective.[7]
The diagnostic system's credibility is undermined by deep financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry. According to research: 69% of DSM-5 task force members had financial ties to drug companies.
Lisa Cosgrove, Ph.D., of the University of Massachusetts Boston, warns that the 'disease model' of psychiatry secured legitimacy for the field but at the cost of objectivity. 'It opened the door to an improper dependence on the pharmaceutical industry,' she says.
DSM-driven diagnostic inflation has led to an explosion in labels that often medicalize experiences. Examples now classified as disorders include:
Caffeine Use Disorder (8%)
Restless Leg Syndrome (13%)
Adjustment Disorder (15%)
Oppositional Defiant Disorder in children (6%)
Some estimates suggest that, when added together, DSM-labeled 'illnesses' outnumber the U.S. population.
While the DSM gives the appearance of a clinical guidebook, it remains—by the admission of psychiatrists—scientifically unsound. Dr. Thomas Insel, former director of the National Institute of Mental Health, declared: 'The weakness of DSM is its lack of validity…. DSM diagnoses are based on consensus about clusters of symptoms, not any objective laboratory measure.'[8]
Psychiatrist Allen Frances, who led the DSM-IV task force, has since warned that DSM has led to the 'medicalization of childhood' and a 'massive, careless over-diagnosis' epidemic. He emphasized: 'Mental illness is terribly misleading because the disorders we diagnose are merely descriptions of behaviors, not well-established diseases.'
In other words, there is no verifiable biological test for depression, ADHD, bipolar or other any other mental disorder. Yet millions are labeled and treated as if they were suffering from chronic medical diseases.
Psychiatric diagnoses do not reveal chemical imbalances. In fact, psychiatrist Professor Joanna Moncrieff, of University College London, notes: 'The theory that depression is caused by low serotonin is not supported by reliable evidence.' Still, patients are routinely prescribed antidepressants under the presumption of such imbalances.
The consequences of psychiatric diagnosing are not just financial—they're deeply personal and often devastating. Women and children are disproportionately affected. Two-thirds of electroshock recipients are women. Children as young as five are prescribed psychiatric drugs. The American Academy of Pediatrics reported a 66% rise in antidepressant use in ages 12–25 between 2016 and 2022.[9]
TIME and Smithsonian have reported on the enduring trend of diagnosing women's physical and emotional struggles as mental illness, delaying real medical care and increasing vulnerability to psychiatric interventions.[10]
Even as access to treatment expands, mental health is declining across all major metrics. TIME summed it up: 'Even as more people flock to therapy, U.S. mental health is getting worse.'[11]
Experts and advocates are calling not for more funding, but for systemic change.
Dr. Frances advises: 'Ignore DSM-5. Its suggestions are reckless, unsupported by science, and will result in unnecessary, harmful, costly treatment.'[12]
'The DSM must be abolished,' says psychiatrist Samuel Timimi.[13]
CCHR, established in 1969 by the Church of Scientology and professor of psychiatry Thomas Szasz, urges lawmakers, healthcare leaders, and the public to reconsider the current trajectory of mental health policy. 'Until psychiatry is held accountable for its unscientific diagnostic system and the harm it inflicts,' says Jan Eastgate, President, CCHR International, 'the crisis will only deepen.'
Sources:
[1] Hanna Barnes, 'Our overdiagnosis epidemic: How a marked rise in the treatment of certain conditions – physical and mental – is harming, not protecting, public health,' The New Statesman, 10 Mar. 2025,
[5] 'Readmission of Patients to Acute Psychiatric Hospitals: Influential Factors and Interventions to Reduce Psychiatric Readmission Rates,' Healthcare (Basel). 2022 Sep 19;10(9):1808, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9498532/
[6] 'National Mental Health Services Survey (N-MHSS): 2018 Data on Mental Health Treatment Facilities – Data on Mental Health Treatment Facilities,' SAMSHA, 2019; Christopher Lane, Ph.D., 'When Psychiatric Treatment Isn't Voluntary,' Psychology Today, 31 Mar. 2023,
[7] 'Forcing homeless people into mental health treatment isn't the way to solve homelessness,' Los Angeles Times, 28 Jan. 2020,
[8] Thomas Insel, 'Transforming Diagnosis,' NIMH Website, 20 Apr. 2013,
[11] 'America Has Reached Peak Therapy. Why Is Our Mental Health Getting Worse?' TIME, 28 Aug. 2024,
[13] Samuel Timimi, 'No more psychiatric labels: Why formal psychiatric diagnostic systems should be abolished,' Int. Journ. of Clinical and Health Psychology, Sept.-Dec. 2014, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S169726001400009X
MULTIMEDIA:
Image caption: 'Until psychiatry is held accountable for its unscientific diagnostic system and the harm it inflicts, the crisis will only deepen.' – Jan Eastgate, President, CCHR International
NEWS SOURCE: Citizens Commission on Human Rights
Keywords: Religion and Churches, Citizens Commission on Human Rights, CCHR International, psychiatry, LOS ANGELES, Calif.
Send2Press® Newswire. Information is believed accurate but not guaranteed. Story ID: S2P125332 APNF0325A
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Alcohol-related liver problems escalate in Wisconsin, especially for women, young people
Deaths from liver diseases that result from consuming too much alcohol are escalating dramatically in Wisconsin, and even more alarming, such diseases are showing up more in younger people. The numbers mirror national trends described in a June 11 study in JAMA Open Network, which found a "significant acceleration" in alcohol-associated liver disease deaths during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Nationwide, such deaths increased nearly 9% annually between 2018 and 2022. In Wisconsin, deaths from cirrhosis of the liver — one of several liver diseases tied to alcohol consumption — rose 35% between 2019 and 2023, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It's well-documented that Americans began drinking more during the pandemic, and coupled with Wisconsin's deeply entrenched drinking culture, experts worry about the toll they're seeing on people's physical health. Alcohol-related deaths generally, which include myriad other causes besides liver problems, increased three-fold in Wisconsin between 1999 and 2020, a January analysis from the Journal Sentinel found. But experts say multidisciplinary treatment, reduced stigma around alcohol use disorder, and a renewed emphasis on education and prevention could improve the situation. "I think the narrative often in Wisconsin is just, 'Oh, we're just big drinkers,' and that's all there is," said Maureen Busalacchi, director of the Wisconsin Alcohol Policy Project at the Medical College of Wisconsin. "The message is not that you can't drink at all. It's more, really think about it, and just drink less." More: Wisconsin's alcohol-related deaths more than tripled since 1999: See the data U.S. dietary guidelines for alcohol urge people of drinking age to limit consumption to one drink or fewer per day for women and two drinks or fewer per day for men. When people consume significant amounts of alcohol over a prolonged period of time, fat begins to turn up in the liver, and then scar tissue, which can lead to cirrhosis, said Dr. Rita German, a transplant hepatologist at UW Health in Madison. Many times, German said, liver disease symptoms such as jaundice, fever and confusion don't show themselves until the disease has progressed, making it harder to treat. Nearly 3,000 Wisconsinites died from alcohol-related liver diseases from 2019 to 2023, CDC data show. The large majority — 2,072 — were from cirrhosis. Deaths from most types of liver diseases due to alcohol consumption increased in those years, including alcoholic fatty liver and alcoholic hepatic failure in addition to cirrhosis. Deaths from alcoholic hepatitis fell slightly. Busalacchi called the numbers a huge concern. Most of these deaths are preventable, she contended. Doctors used to think of alcohol-related liver diseases as affecting people past middle age, German said. But increasingly, that age is dropping. At UW Health's multidisciplinary clinic for patients with such diseases, she said, the average age is now 45, and she's treated some as young as 25. More: Alcohol-related deaths in Wisconsin tripled since 1999. Will a new warning from the surgeon general slow the trend? That may seem to conflict with recent research showing young people, particularly Gen Z, drinking less. But while some are cutting back, those who do drink are drinking more heavily, Busalacchi said. And while alcohol use among Wisconsin high schoolers has generally decreased in recent years, more than one in 10 reported binge drinking in the last 30 days on the state's most recent Youth Risk Behavior Survey, done in 2023. The JAMA study noted, in particular, increases in alcohol-related liver disease deaths among adults ages 25-44. Deaths among women also increased disproportionately. Women absorb more alcohol into their bloodstream because they're generally smaller than men and because women's bodies have less gastric alcohol dehydrogenase, the enzyme that breaks down alcohol in the stomach, German said. Thus, they're at greater risk for liver damage. The Medical College of Wisconsin's liver transplant team reports younger and younger women needing transplants due to alcohol consumption, Busalacchi said. More: US to drop guidance to limit alcohol to one or two drinks per day, sources say To catch alcohol-related liver diseases earlier, German said, it's critical that patients be forthcoming about their alcohol use at the doctor's office. And for that to happen, she said, doctors must view alcohol use disorder for what it is — a disease, not a personal failing. People who are concerned about their alcohol consumption may also request an ultrasound of their liver, German said. From there, they can begin treatment if need be. She also sees the benefits in treatment that is comprehensive. At UW Health's clinic, patients not only see doctors like German who attend to the liver, but addiction specialists and counselors to treat underlying mental health conditions that can drive alcohol use. The clinic has treated between 250 and 300 people since it began in 2021. If it's caught in time, fat and scarring in the liver can be reversed by abstaining from alcohol, German said. Busalacchi's work continues to focus on changing societal perceptions on drinking culture. She sees encouraging signs around the state from communities that are offering more education about the consequences of excessive drinking, especially for youth. Some are taking a harder stance on age compliance checks for alcohol sales. Madeline Heim covers health and the environment for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Contact her at 920-996-7266 or mheim@ This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Wisconsin deaths from alcohol-related liver diseases sharply rise
UPI
an hour ago
- UPI
Medicaid cuts would leave the working class more vulnerable
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that 7.8 million Americans across the United States would lose their coverage through Medicaid -– the public program that provides health insurance to low-income families and individuals -– under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act making its way through Congress. Photo by Jonathan Borb/ Pexels The Congressional Budget Office estimates that 7.8 million Americans across the United States would lose their coverage through Medicaid -- the public program that provides health insurance to low-income families and individuals -- under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act making its way through Congress. That includes 248,000 to 414,000 of my fellow residents of Michigan, based on the House Reconciliation Bill in early June 2025. There are similarly deep projected cuts within the Senate version of the legislation. Many of these people are working Americans who would lose Medicaid because of the onerous paperwork involved with the proposed work requirements. They wouldn't be able to get coverage in the Affordable Care Act Marketplaces after losing Medicaid. Premiums and out-of-pocket costs are likely to be too high for those making less than 100% to 138% of the federal poverty level who do not qualify for health insurance marketplace subsidies. Funding for this program is also under threat. And despite being employed, they also wouldn't be able to get health insurance through their employers because it is either too expensive or not offered to them. Researchers estimate that coverage losses would lead to thousands of medically preventable deaths across the country because people would be unable to access health care without insurance. I am a physician, health economist and policy researcher who has cared for patients on Medicaid and written about health care in the United States for more than eight years. I think it's important to understand the role of Medicaid within the broader insurance landscape. Medicaid has become a crucial source of health coverage for low-wage workers. Michigan removed work requirements from Medicaid A few years ago, Michigan was slated to institute Medicaid work requirements, but the courts blocked the implementation of that policy in 2020. It would have cost upward of $70 million due to software upgrades, staff training, and outreach to Michigan residents enrolled in the Medicaid program, according to the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. Had it gone into effect, 100,000 state residents were expected to lose coverage within the first year. The state took the formal step of eliminating work requirements from its statutes earlier this year in recognition of implementation costs being too high and mounting evidence against the policy's effectiveness. When Arkansas instituted Medicaid work requirements in 2018, there was no increase in employment, but within months, thousands of people enrolled in the program lost their coverage. The reason? Many people were subjected to paperwork and red tape, but there weren't actually that many people who would fail to meet the criteria of the work requirements. It is a recipe for widespread coverage losses without meeting any of the policy's purported goals. Work requirements, far from incentivizing work, paradoxically remove working people from Medicaid with nowhere else to go for insurance. Shortcomings of employer-sponsored insurance Nearly half of Americans get their health insurance through their employers. In contrast to a universal system that covers everyone from cradle to grave, an employer-first system leaves huge swaths of the population uninsured. This includes tens of millions of working Americans who are unable to get health insurance through their employers, especially low-income workers who are less likely to even get the choice of coverage from their employers. More than 80% of managers and professionals have employer-sponsored health coverage, but only 50% to 70% of blue-collar workers in service jobs, farming, construction, manufacturing and transportation can say the same. There are some legal requirements mandating employers to provide health insurance to their employees, but the reality of low-wage work means many do not fall under these legal protections. For example, employers are allowed to incorporate a waiting period of up to 90 days before health coverage begins. The legal requirement also applies only to full-time workers. Health coverage can thus remain out of reach for seasonal and temporary workers, part-time employees and gig workers. Even if an employer offers health insurance to their low-wage employees, those workers may forego it because the premiums and deductibles are too high to make it worth earning less take-home pay. To make matters worse, layoffs are more common for low-wage workers, leaving them with limited options for health insurance during job transitions. And many employers have increasingly shed low-wage staff, such as drivers and cleaning staff, from their employment rolls and contracted that work out. Known as the fissuring of the workplace, it allows employers of predominately high-income employees to continue offering generous benefits while leaving no such commitment to low-wage workers employed as contractors. Medicaid fills in gaps Low-income workers without access to employer-sponsored insurance had virtually no options for health insurance in the years before key parts of the Affordable Care Act went into effect in 2014. Research my co-authors and I conducted showed that blue-collar workers have since gained health insurance coverage, cutting the uninsured rate by a third thanks to the expansion of Medicaid eligibility and subsidies in the health insurance marketplaces. This means low-income workers can more consistently see doctors, get preventive care and fill prescriptions. Further evidence from Michigan's experience has shown that Medicaid can help the people it covers do a better job at work by addressing health impairments. It can also improve their financial well-being, including fewer problems with debt, fewer bankruptcies, higher credit scores and fewer evictions. Premiums and cost sharing in Medicaid are minimal compared with employer-sponsored insurance, making it a more realistic and accessible option for low-income workers. And because Medicaid is not tied directly to employment, it can promote job mobility, allowing workers to maintain coverage within or between jobs without having to go through the bureaucratic complexity of certifying work. Of course, Medicaid has its own shortcomings. Payment rates to providers are low relative to other insurers, access to doctors can be limited, and the program varies significantly by state. But these weaknesses stem largely from underfunding and political hostility - not from any intrinsic flaw in the model. If anything, Medicaid's success in covering low-income workers and containing per-enrollee costs points to its potential as a broader foundation for health coverage. The current employer-based system, which is propped up by an enormous and regressive tax break for employer-sponsored insurance premiums, favors high-income earners and contributes to wage stagnation. In my view, which is shared by other health economists, a more public, universal model could better cover Americans regardless of how someone earns a living. Over the past six decades, Medicaid has quietly stepped into the breach left by employer-sponsored insurance. Medicaid started as a welfare program for the needy in the 1960s, but it has evolved and adapted to fill the needs of a country whose health care system leaves far too many uninsured. Sumit Agarwal is an assistant professor of internal medicine at the University of Michigan. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. The views and opinions in this commentary are solely the views of the author.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
The 4 Best Cheeses for Insulin Resistance, According to Dietitians
Reviewed by Dietitian Karen Ansel, M.S., RDNMany people with insulin resistance assume there are lots of foods they can't eat. This may cause them to avoid many healthy foods, including cheese. Small servings of calcium- and protein-rich cheese can be part of a healthy meal plan for insulin many as 40% of Americans between the ages of 18 and 44 are living with insulin resistance. If you're one of them, there's probably a long list of foods you think you can't eat, including cheese. But there's good news. According to dietitians, cheese can have a place in a healthy diet, even if you have insulin resistance. We hear about insulin resistance a lot. But what, exactly, is it? 'Insulin resistance is when someone builds up a tolerance to insulin, making the hormone less effective,' says Toby Amidor, M.S., RD. 'This results in the need for more insulin to take up blood sugar.' Over time, the cells in the pancreas that are responsible for producing insulin can stop working effectively. Eventually, this can lead to prediabetes or type 2 diabetes and may increase the risk of heart disease. Modifying your diet and lifestyle habits can help prevent the progression of insulin resistance. However, that doesn't mean you still can't enjoy some of your favorite foods in moderation, like cheese. To find out the best of the best, we asked registered dietitians to share their top choices for people with insulin resistance. Here are their four favorites. Research has linked dairy products, particularly low-fat dairy, to a reduced risk of insulin resistance. Low-fat Cheddar is an outstanding pick. This reduced-fat cheese is especially rich in calcium and protein, two nutrients that may help protect against insulin resistance by enhancing the body's ability to burn fat, including highly volatile abdominal—aka visceral—fat. That's not all, though. Protein also helps promote satiety, further protecting against weight gain that may also contribute to insulin resistance. One ounce of low-fat Cheddar gives you 7 grams of high-quality protein and roughly 9% of your daily calcium requirement. As its name hints, it's also low in fat, with only 2 grams of total fat and 1 gram of saturated fat per ounce. So, it's heart-healthy, too. Cultured dairy products, like Gouda cheese, boast a unique nutrient and amino acid profile that's particularly beneficial for insulin resistance, says Amidor. Research also suggests that Gouda's rich live bacteria may lead to favorable changes in gut bacteria for an extra layer of protection. 'In addition, these and most cheeses have a low glycemic index, which means that when eaten on their own they don't spike blood sugar,' explains Amidor. One ounce of Gouda has 7 grams of protein and less than 1 gram of carbohydrate. However, with roughly 230 milligrams of sodium per ounce, it's higher in sodium than some other cheeses. 'Cheese can be a significant source of sodium, and a high-sodium diet increases the risk of heart disease,' says Amy Brownstein, M.S., RDN. That doesn't mean you have to skip it entirely. But if Gouda is one of your favorites, be sure to consider its sodium in the context of your overall eating pattern. 'People who have insulin resistance should opt for a lower-carbohydrate cheese, which will have less of an impact on blood sugar levels,' says Brownstein. Enter part-skim mozzarella. It's low in carbs with less than 1 gram of carbohydrate per ounce. At the same time, each ounce contains 7 grams of satisfying protein. Because protein is more slowly digested than carbohydrates, this may help you eat less. That may help with weight management, which may also improve insulin resistance. Another plus: part-skim mozzarella is higher in calcium than many other cheeses, delivering roughly 17% of your daily needs per ounce. It's also lower in sodium, with 175 mg sodium per ounce. To top things all off, it's low in fat with just 4.5 grams of total fat and 1 gram of saturated fat per ounce. This pungent, soft cheese may seem like an indulgent choice. But it can actually be a good option for people with insulin resistance. How so? 'Insulin resistance causes blood sugar levels to remain high, contributing to inflammation and changes to blood vessels,' says Brownstein. These effects can damage blood vessels, increase blood pressure and negatively impact heart health, which can raise the risk of heart disease, she explains. That's where Brie cheese can help. Like part-skim mozzarella, it's one of the lower-sodium cheeses (about 180 mg sodium per ounce), meaning it's less likely to spike your blood pressure. With these dietitian-approved strategies, cheese can still be on the menu, even if you have insulin resistance. Consider Portion Size. Cheese can be a tasty way to add more calcium and protein to your favorite meals and snacks. Yet, it's also often high in saturated fat, sodium and calories, which may be counterproductive for managing insulin resistance, particularly if you're not paying attention to portion size. 'Even if you are choosing cultured cheese, it should be consumed in appropriate portion sizes of about 1 ounce,' says Amidor. Pair Cheese with Fiber-Rich Foods. Cheese is often eaten with carbohydrate-rich foods like bread, crackers or pasta. When that's the case, Brownstein recommends adding some nonstarchy vegetables to your plate. 'Nonstarchy, high-fiber vegetables contribute to satiety with minimal influence on blood sugar,' she says. 'Plus, a high-fiber diet is associated with a reduced risk of insulin resistance.' Think Balance. Cheese can be part of a balanced eating pattern. But it shouldn't be your primary source of protein or calcium. Instead, focus on eating a variety of foods from all food groups with small servings of cheese added for flavor and enjoyment. Pro tip: Choose robust cheeses like Gouda or Cheddar. Their intense flavor will satisfy you, making it easier to eat less of them overall. Managing insulin resistance can seem like a challenge, especially when it comes to what you eat. However, if you've been avoiding cheese, you may not have to. Dietitians say cheeses like low-fat Cheddar, part-skim mozzarella, Gouda and Brie can all be part of a healthy eating plan, even if you have insulin resistance. These cheeses provide calcium and protein, which have been shown to reduce insulin resistance. Just keep in mind that cheese can be high in sodium and saturated fat. So, keep serving sizes small, about 1 ounce. For even better results, pair your cheese with other healthy foods, especially low-carb, fiber-rich nonstarchy veggies. Read the original article on EATINGWELL
