Thu Sep 26 13:00:55 UTC 2024: ## 54 Years Later, Concerns Over Government-Funded Drugging of Children Remain Unresolved
**A 1970 Congressional hearing exposed alarming practices of using amphetamines and Ritalin to “modify behavior” of children in schools, sparking concerns that the government was funding an uncontrolled drug experiment.**
In 1970, Congressman Cornelis Gallagher held a hearing to investigate the federal government’s role in promoting the use of these drugs for behavioral modification in children. While campaigning against drug abuse, the government was simultaneously funding research that saw children being medicated for conditions like “Minimal Brain Dysfunction,” later rebranded as ADHD.
The hearing highlighted several alarming issues:
* **Lack of Scientific Evidence:** No concrete scientific evidence supported the existence of the alleged brain abnormalities being treated. This lack of scientific backing persists today.
* **Coercion and Harassment:** Parents testified about the pressure exerted by school officials to have their children enrolled in these drug programs, essentially turning schools into uncontrolled drug experiments.
* **Mislabeling and Misdiagnosis:** The use of these drugs was packaged as a solution to educational problems, raising concerns about mislabeling children and neglecting underlying issues.
The prophecy of the drug’s widespread use was fulfilled. In 2020 alone, almost 10 million Americans were taking psychiatric drugs for ADHD, including nearly 4.5 million children.
Despite over 50 years of research, experts still lack a clear understanding of how these drugs work. Even the FDA acknowledges that the “mode of action” for Ritalin and amphetamines is unclear.
Despite Congressman Gallagher’s concerns, federal funding for mental health services has increased exponentially. Today, the government invests billions in mental health programs, including school-based initiatives that were specifically warned against in 1970.
**The article concludes with a call for another Congressional hearing to re-examine the government’s role in mental health services and the widespread use of these drugs on children.** It argues that, despite decades of investment, no significant improvements in mental health have been observed, and that the lack of scientific understanding surrounding these drugs raises serious concerns.
First Piper 