Author name: Robert Carter

Blog

Dr David Healy An ECT Wolf in Anti-Big Pharma Clothing

Ban Electroshock Therapy ECT: Brutality Prescribed Dr. David Healy: An ECT Wolf in Anti-Big Pharma Clothing August 26, 2025 – Robert Carter      Psychiatrist David Healy has been a long term critic of psychiatric drugs, citing the contribution of antidepressants to suicide and the financial gains of academic institutions from money from Big Pharma. His book Let Them Eat Prozac, published in 2004, has become a bible for anti-psychiatry, anti-psychotropic medication proponents.      Then, in 2007 he published Shock Therapy, an unapologetic recommendation of electroconvulsive therapy.      How could that be?      Well, Max Fink is apparently a co-author. Psychiatrist Fink was America’s leading proponent of the benefits of electroshock therapy for the last half century, founded the journal Convulsive Therapy (now The Journal of ECT) and started the Scion Natural Science Association. Fink made promotional videos for the Somatics company, leading manufacturer of ECT delivery devices, and published books and article after article denying ECT had any noteworthy negative effects.      Fink’s Scion Natural Science Association is a non-profit now run by his family with an annual average charitable disbursement of less than $20 thousand. However, it did fund the authors of Shock Therapy with $34,000 – twice their annual charitable donations — to write the book.      Shock Therapy is as unapologetically pro-ECT as anything Fink himself wrote during his lifetime and it denies any “downside” to ECT and advocates its use over pharmaceutical medication for those who are mentally ill.      The book opens with the statement “So clear are the benefits from ECT for patients who might otherwise commit suicide, or otherwise languish for years in the blackness of depression, that there should be little controversy over whether it is safe or effective.”      Brain damage from ECT is an “urban myth,” the authors claim, and reports of memory loss are not significant enough to be considered.      Those claims, of course, run counter to the decades of valid research that show ECT does cause memory loss, both temporary and permanent, raises the risk of dangerous cardiac conditions, and has a higher incidence of suicide in its recipients.      Since 1997 psychiatrist Healy has been paid around $40,000 annually as an expert witness in anti-psychotropic drug trials such as the $8 million dollar settlement against GlaxoSmithKline trial in 2001 over Paxil. In 2002 Healy sued the University of Toronto for $6 million for violation of his academic freedom and defamation as a physician because of his voiced opinions. The out of court settlement of the lawsuit included his appointment as a visiting professor at a University of Toronto affiliate center.      In other words, he has been able to capitalize on his anti-psychotropic, pro ECT opinions.      A shill is defined as an accomplice of a swindler who acts as an enthusiastic customer to entice or encourage others. Healy may be an expert witness, but he has also done well as the perfect shill for the electroshock industry. Comments are moderated. You must be logged in to comment. Please keep it civil 

Inadequate, Biased Informed Consent Protocol Given to Most ECT Patients
Articles

Inadequate Informed Consent Given to Most ECT Patients

Ban Electroshock Therapy ECT: Brutality Prescribed Inadequate, Biased Informed Consent Protocol Given to Most ECT Patients August 18, 2025 – Robert Carter      Dr. Chris Harrop, a clinical psychologist, just published on MadinAmerica.com the results of two surveys he and his colleagues conducted on-line on 1144 recipients of ECT and their caregivers. Per their responses, few unbiased, standard informed consent procedures are done by psychiatrists or ECT administering personnel in 44 countries.      More than half the respondents were from the US, UK, Australia, and  Canada, and the ECT procedures were “modern” ECT, delivered between 2010 and 2024. 74 percent of the ECT sessions were given for “depression.” 17 percent were given for psychosis or schizophrenia, 15 percent for bipolar/mania, and about 8 percent for catatonia.      One set of questions in the study addressed the application of the informed consent law that demands a prospective patient be given a thorough explanation of the benefits and risks of any procedure before it can legally be administered.      63 percent of the patients and their caretakers were told, erroneously, that  “ECT is the most effective treatment for severe depression.” 78 percent were told that “ECT can be life-saving and can prevent suicide.”           Neither of those “benefits” has been proven to be true by any valid studies. In fact, only eleven random, placebo-based studies of ECT have ever been done, and those were all done forty years ago. None of them showed any convincing, scientifically valid measure of actual benefits from ECT, and only 17 percent of the patients or their caregivers were told that there is, in fact, no clinical evidence of any long term benefits from ECT.      So much for honestly naming the benefits of ECT through the current informed consent legal protocol. How about accurately giving the safety risks?      Only 17 percent of the ECT candidates were told that there was any long term or permanent memory damage. Only 12 percent were told that there was a risk of heart problems after ECT.      Even the American Psychiatric Association and the FDA now admit that ECT can cause permanent memory problems. One recent study has also estimated that between one in fifteen and one in thirty ECT recipients has had a non-optimum “cardiac event” after ECT.      Although these results could be questioned as anecdotal and subjective because of the “personal” nature of the on-line questioning, the high percentage of false benefits and risks given to these 1144 people is noteworthy. If more than three quarters of ECT patients are being lied to about the benefits and risks of ECT, the violation of informed consent laws means that seventy-five percent of all ECT patients are being given the treatment illegally.      In the UK it is known that about one third of all ECT patients are forced to receive the treatment against their will because they have been deemed  “incompetent” to give their rational consent. The results of this new study show that far more patients than that are apparently “consenting,” but they are not consenting to the actual benefits and risks of ECT.      That’s really no better than administering ECT against their will. Comments are moderated. You must be logged in to comment. Please keep it civil 

Blog

Max Fink, Crazed Pro-ECT Shrink

Ban Electroshock Therapy ECT: Brutality Prescribed Max Fink, Crazed Pro-ECT Shrink August 16, 2025 – Robert Carter      Even Dr. Charles Nemeroff, Chair of Psychiatry at the University of Texas at Austin, called pro-ECT psychiatrist Max Fink “an irascible, dominant figure” and “a zealot, no question about it. He thought ECT was a panacea.”      In 1985 Fink had founded the journal Convulsive Therapy, now a website, and served on the American Psychiatric Association’s task forces on ECT in the nineteen-seventies and nineteen-eighties. He was the most active voice within psychiatry for the use of electroshock therapy until his death this year, but he had not always been a fan of ECT.      After watching an ECT treatment in 1952, he said “As the currents were applied, the neck and back arched, the body became rigid, followed by rhythmic muscle movements and breath holding. The patient became cyanotic with blue lips, movements stopped, the muscles relaxed, deep breathing followed, cyanosis waned, and color returned to the lips as the patient was moved to a recovery room.”      He claimed he was “jarred” by the sight because he had been trained that all convulsions were to be avoided as they could cause fractures and lethal injuries.      Somehow, over the following yeas, his view of ECT changed considerably.      He soon decided that ECT had a biochemical healing basis and he  eventually concluded that the memory loss that was induced by ECT was actually “a hysterical symptom,” parallel to the public’s highly emotional reaction to the Camelford, England, sulphuric acid water pollution  catastrophe in 1988. That catastrophe proved to have severe short term and long term effects on many of the local residents of Cornwall. That hysteria was not unwarranted.      As he gained prominence in the psychiatric world, Fink was awarded U.S. government funding for a large study that compared the ECT to psychiatric medication for severely depressed patients. Unbelievably, Fink claimed that his study found that of 87 percent of his patients went into remission from depression after ECT.      No study before or since ever claimed anything even close to that efficacy rate, and most studies done in the last twenty years show very little remission immediately, and almost no long term remission of symptoms after ECT treatments. Fink’s “results” also do not measure the long term dangers to ECT patients from short and long term memory loss, increased cardiac difficulties, and increased suicide rates.      A 2002 Times of India article on Fink reported that when asked “How safe is ECT?” Fink’s cavalier reply was “If there are some deaths, that has only to do with the fact that they didn’t do it right.”      Over his long life Fink advanced the idea within psychiatry that  electroconvulsive therapy was a valuable treatment and it shouldn’t be considered just as a last resort, which the FDA has dictated is its only  application. In 2019, as he received a lifetime achievement award from the Institute of Living , a prominent ECT delivery center in Hartford, Conn, he did acknowledge, though, that “We had a problem getting this accepted by the public.”      Given the number of lives that have been affected by the brutal effects of ECT, that’s hardly surprising, Max.      Unfortunately, though, the  psychiatric profession has not had that much problem being convinced of Fink’s false claims for ECT.  Psychiatrists deliver more than a million ECT sessions globally each year. Comments are moderated. You must be logged in to comment. Please keep it civil 

Articles

The Dark Irony of ECT Use during the Nazi Regime

Ban Electroshock Therapy Latest News The Dark Irony of ECT Use during the Nazi Regime  July 17, 2025 – Robert Carter        Italian psychiatrist Ugo Cerletti introduced his “new” electroconvulsive machine to the Royal Medical Academy in Rome in 1938. He hailed it as a “safer” therapy for schizophrenics than insulin shock and the other chemical methods then used to induce the grand mal seizure that was supposed to “cure” schizophrenia.      Psychiatrists at the time were indoctrinated by the false idea that schizophrenia could be treated by an epileptic seizure, and many embraced Cerletti’s new technology and set about implementing it in their practices, especially on the schizophrenic population of their insane asylums.      Nazi psychiatrists, however, were not so enthusiastic about ECT’s  potential. They did not seek a cure to schizophrenia. They were working hard on eliminating schizophrenics from their “pure” Aryan race by enforced castration, sterilization and – even more effective – the gassing of those “unworthy of life” through their Aktion T4 program that began in 1939.      They didn’t want a therapy that might “cure” someone’s behavior if the core problem was in the “chemical  imbalance” of that person’s genes. They just wanted them gone. Between 1939-1941 over 70,000 of the mentally  “deficient” were eliminated in six Nazi killing centers.      When it became publicly exposed in 1941 that the Aktion T4 program was removing patients from hospitals and institutions and gassing them to death in facilities disguised as shower rooms, the killing of those “unworthy of life” was then done covertly through lethal injection and starvation. These Nazi euthanasia programs then killed another 350,000 individuals by the end of the war.      There was therefore no rush by the Nazi regime to use these new ECT devices they thought might rehabilitate those genetically defective schizophrenics.      Dr. Emil Gelny, head of two psychiatric hospitals in Austria, did find a suitable use for these new ECT devices. He had been killing his  “incurable” patients with lethal doses of morphine and barbiturates since 1943, but those drugs were becomingly increasingly difficult to obtain later during the war.      Then he ran across an ECT machine. By adding two more electrodes to it and increasing the voltage, he created a perfect killing machine. It was easily obtainable, cost effective, and patients only thought they were undergoing a standard medical procedure with it, so they didn’t resist. It is estimated that almost five thousand of Gelny’s  “incurable” patients were killed at his two hospitals by the end of the Third Reich.      Meanwhile, at Auschwitz and other Nazi concentration camps, another use was found for the ECT device. SS  doctors, including the infamous Josef Mengele, had discovered ECT devices could be used to test just how much voltage a human body could withstand before dying. The new ECT machines became treasured devices in their deadly human experimentation on camps’ prisoners.      Other Nazi concentration camp officials were finding that a few ECT sessions could bring slacking prisoners back into the camps’ work force as “productive” labor, and ECT shocks began being regularly used on prisoners to increase their usefulness by brutally snapping them out of their supposed lethargy with the harsh voltage. Those who did not respond to the electroshocks, however, were just “eliminated” altogether.      The Nazi regime recognized the potential of these new electroshock devices for what they really were: instruments of torture. Although psychiatrists at that time could only justify as a “therapeutic cure” the brutal shocking of a person with high voltage to induce a grand mal seizure, the death camp psychiatrists used no such therapeutic excuse for their vicious employment of what they saw were obviously only lethal machines. Comments are moderated. You must be logged in to comment. Please keep it civil 

Does Electroconvulsive Therapy’s Brutal Voltage Merely Snap Someone Violently -- but Temporarily -- into Present Time?
Blog

Second ECT Blow

Ban Electroshock Therapy ECT: Brutality Prescribed Does Electroconvulsive Therapy’s Brutal Voltage Merely Snap Someone Violently — but Temporarily — into Present Time? August 6, 2025 – Robert Carter      As if one blow to the brain from 460 volts of electricity wasn’t enough, Penn State researchers have recently  discovered there’s a second, high amplitude wave that passes through a person’s brain immediately after the seizure from electroconvulsive therapy.      Using newly created optical imaging technology, the Penn State team discovered this second blow to the brain which they call a “hard reset” to every neuron in its path. In ECT’s eighty-four year history this is the first time the second shockwave has been noticed in the study’s neuro-imaging of mouse and human brains.      The Penn Medicine news announcement also cites a 2022 New England Journal of Medicine article for validation of ECT procedure efficacy, although that article adds that the  actual “mechanism is not known, but a seizure is required for efficacy.” The new neuro-imaging information does not suggest any new theory about this unknown mechanism, but it does  reveal the magnitude of a second blow to the brain.      There’s an old, slightly cruel joke about a farmer who cannot get his mule to plow a field. He asks a neighboring farmer for help, and that fellow –  probably a part-time psychiatrist – picks up a two-by-four and smacks the mule as hard as he can with it across the head. The mule immediately allows itself to be hitched up and starts  plowing the farmer’s field.      “First thing you have to do is get the mule’s attention,” the neighboring farmer says.      Those two blows from ECT’s voltage certainly get a patient’s attention, we suspect.       In fact, the immediate surge in non-psychotic thoughts and emotions reported by some ECT recipients after ECT might be attributed to their  sudden violent arrival in present time. Their “attention” has indeed been  gotten. That would also explain their rather quick return to a prior  uncomfortable emotional and mental state as their short term enforced, violent attention on present time recedes.      Of course, no studies have shown anything but negative long term effects from ECT: moderate to severe memory losses, increases in cardiac difficulties, higher suicide rates.      ECT is just the most recent attempt by psychiatry to use brutal force to “cure” someone of his or her  abnormalities. Lobotomies, trans-orbital leukotomies, insulin shock coma, and forced sterilization are all “therapies” created by psychiatry over the last hundred years to “help” their fellow man. Even nullifying  undesirable aspects of the personality through mind-numbing antidepressants and psychotropic prescriptions is a vicious use of  chemicals to control behavior through attacking the body with some form of force.      Apparently there is still a deep confusion between “help” and  “punishment” in the brutal world of psychiatry. Comments are moderated. You must be logged in to comment. Please keep it civil 

Articles

APA Admits Some of the Risks of Electroshock Therapy

Ban Electroshock Therapy Latest News American Psychiatric Association Finally Admits Some of the Risks of Electroshock Therapy   July 9, 2025 – Robert Carter            The American Psychiatric  Association has recently offered new cautions on the use of ECT after citing the risks of long-term memory loss and other health concerns due to the procedure. They recommend against the use of ECT in children. They also now stress the need to ensure that patients are receiving a full informed consent overview when ECT is  recommended.      It’s about time.      There is no study that shows electroshock therapy to be effective in treating mental disorders. One study of seventy thousand American veterans with comparable mental problems showed that there was no difference in outcome from those who received ECT and those who didn’t. Only four of the eleven placebo-based ECT studies ever done – all before 1985, by the way – showed ECT to beat the placebo for effectiveness, and the protocol for those four studies has itself been found to be scientifically questionable.      There are now studies that show that patients who receive ECT are forty-five times more likely to successfully commit suicide than the general public. Other studies show that a third of all ECT recipients have persistent memory loss that can last for years. Life threatening cardiac conditions have also been confirmed in ECT recipients, including those with no prior heart condition.      The fact that ECT is delivered at all is based on a bogus psychiatric premise from the 1940s that said that because schizophrenics did not suffer with epilepsy, and epileptics did not suffer with schizophrenia, inducing an epileptic seizure should “cure” schizophrenia.      What?      Even the psychiatric term “schizophrenia” is of questionable validity. Swiss psychiatrist Eugen Bleuler coined the term in 1908, but he claimed the “disease” had a genetic, biological base. Because of his early “chemical imbalance” theory, he suggested schizophrenics be forcibly controlled, not rehabilitated.      His solution was the enforced castration and sterilization of the schizophrenics incarcerated in his clinic in Zurich. His theories, of course, became popular with the Nazi regime when they began eliminating any impurities within their “pure” race.      The American Psychiatric Association, with its new “guidance” for the administration of ECT, has at least stuck a couple of its toes into the 21 st century. They’re still far behind the World Health Organization’s stance, however, that says that involuntary ECT is “torture.”      And they’re even further behind in facing the unending studies that now show the truly harmful effects of zapping a human being’s brain with 460 volts of electricity in order to eradicate a bogus mental disorder. Comments are moderated. You must be logged in to comment. Please keep it civil 

Post-concussion Euphoria
Blog

Post-concussion Euphoria: Why a Few Feel that ECT “Works”?

Ban Electroshock Therapy ECT: Brutality Prescribed Post-concussion Euphoria:Why a Few Feel that ECT “Works”? July 8, 2025 – Robert Carter The opponents of electroconvulsive therapy cite the numerous studies that have been done which show that victims of psychiatry’s ECT treatments have a higher incidence of suicide, greater risk of cardiac problems, and consistent memory losses. Because there have been no placebo-based, scientific trials for ECT in the last forty years – and the earlier ones are scientifically questionable – proponents of ECT tend to cite personal, anecdotal reports from those who feel ECT has helped them. There are a number of those – including from such public figures like Kitty Dukakis and Carrie Fisher – but they are personal, subjective opinions and not necessarily scientifically factual. Dukakis and Fisher both reported feeling immediate benefits from ECT – despite acknowledging their significant memory loss — and they each underwent ECT treatment after ECT treatment during their lives to “maintain” those benefits. The “gains” apparently soon wore off…without further electroshock sessions. As with any well known public figures, their personal stories about the “value” of ECT have influenced many people in its favor. Given the large amount of scientifically valid data about the dangers of ECT, it’s hard for anyone to square these positive accounts about ECT with its proven dangers. No one suspects these people of dishonesty, but one wonders how they can feel so positive about ECT after experiencing its 460 volt electroshock. “Post-concussion euphoria” might provide the answer. Medical studies now show that after a traumatic brain injury, a feeling of particularly intense well-being, happiness, or excitement can occur for a time period. In fact, a person doesn’t just feel content or happy. They feel a highly exaggerated, if quite inappropriate sense of well-being. They are overly cheerful, unexpectedly excited, and they often experience a heightened and unrealistic sense of self-esteem. Being zapped by 460 volts of electricity ought to be enough to cause the kind of traumatic brain injury that causes that kind of euphoria. And that euphoria – temporary as it might be – ought also to be enough to prompt those glowing reports about ECT from those who make them. It’s also enough to keep them going back for more electric jolts during their lifetime to re-experience that unrealistic self- esteem…not unlike an addict having to keep shooting up to re-experience that high. On the other hand, Ernest Hemingway said about his own early ECT sessions, “It was a brilliant cure, but we lost the patient.” He committed suicide hours after undergoing his thirty-sixth ECT session, against his will. After repeated ECT sessions, Judy Garland said, “I couldn’t learn  anything. I couldn’t retain anything. I was just up there (on the set of Annie Get Your Gun) making strange noises.” Her life was filled with one suicide attempt after another. Apparently, no euphoria from electroshock for those two. Probably not much euphoria, either, from the other hundred thousand Americans who undergo ECT every year and experience the severe memory loss, increased suicide rates, and dangerous heart conditions that more usually follow that brutal ECT jolt. Comments are moderated. You must be logged in to comment. Please keep it civil

Articles

Suicide and Death Rates Skyrocket for ECT Victims

Ban Electroshock Therapy Latest News Suicide and Death Rates Skyrocket for ECT Victims      Less than one percent of the general population commits suicide. Fourteen percent of all ECT patients commit suicide.      The institutions and psychiatrists who perform ECT do not keep much in the way of records, or if they do, they are for the most part not published. No one wants to expose their own sins.      Instead, they call ECT “help.”      One 2011 British study tracked suicides among psychiatric patients and found that nearly half of those treated with ECT died by suicide within three months of their discharge.     A 2007 Danish study of all inpatient deaths at a psychiatric hospital over a twenty-five year period found that ECT patents had a twenty percent higher risk of death by suicide.      The mortality rate of those who have received ECT is also much higher than the general population. One study shows one death for every ninety-one ECT treatments…and that’s when the patient dies during the procedure itself, not afterward, because of suicide or complications.      Your risk of dying from an ECT procedure is greater if you are elderly. A Kroessler and Fogel study spanning twelve years of ECT research from 1974-1986 showed that one of every four elderly patients died from an ECT treatment. Another 2010 survey showed that ECT deaths were actually ten to a hundred times more common than what the American Psychiatric Association had been reporting.      Not only were psychiatrists not exposing their sins, they were lying about them.      (This article is an excerpt from our free downloadable broadsheet Shock Therapy). Comments are moderated. You must be logged in to comment. Please keep it civil 

Articles

Ernest Hemingway: “We Lost the Patient…”

Ban Electroshock Therapy Latest News Ernest Hemingway: ECT Treatment Successful, But “We Lost the Patient…”      Renowned American author and winner of the Pulitzer Prize in 1953 and the Nobel Prize in 1954, Ernest Hemingway committed suicide the day after his thirty-sixth ECT session in 1961.      In the late 1950s he had become depressed and had announced that FBI agents were tailing him and tapping his phone. For a “cure,” he was prescribed the first of three dozen ECT treatments in 1960 at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota.         At first he objected to a proposed stay at the Menninger Clinic. “They’ll say I’m losingmy marbles,” he said.       Finally he underwent his first battery of electroshocks and was returned home, but after a few weeks his “symptoms” returned and he was sent back for more electroshock. After some of these sessions, he could not remember his name.      “Well, what is the sense of ruining my head and erasing my memory, which is my capital, and putting me out of business?” Hemingway said. “It was a brilliant cure, but we lost the patient….”      Hemingway’s weight dropped from a robust 220 pounds to a frail 160 pounds during the course of these treatments, and per James Nagle, his biographer and President of the International Hemingway Society, Hemingway “would get on his knees and cry and beg his wife not to send him back for more shock treatments.”        After his thirty-sixth electroshock treatment at the Mayo clinic, Hemingway returned home, got out his favorite Scott 12 gauge shotgun, propped it against the linoleum kitchen floor, placed the two barrels in his mouth and pulled both triggers.      Some time after the Freedom of Information Act had been passed in 1966, it was discovered that J. Edgar Hoover had, in fact, assigned an agent in Cuba to watch Hemingway in the 1950’s and that Hemingway’s phone had in fact been tapped and that FBI agent reports had continuously been filed on him all during his stay at St. Mary’s hospital.   (This article is an excerpt from our free downloadable broadsheet Shock Therapy). Comments are moderated. You must be logged in to comment. Please keep it civil 

Articles

The First Electroshock “Therapy”

Ban Electroshock Therapy Latest News The First Electroshock “Therapy”      In 1938 psychiatrist Ugo Cerletti was still trying to perfect his idea of inducing seizures in his patients to cure their schizophrenia…a dubious idea at best. He had gotten it into his mind that a strong jolt of electricity would be a great way to induce  “therapeutic” convulsions in schizophrenics to reduce their “tension and hostility.”        Of course, most other physicians on the planet were trying their best to safeguard their patients from having seizures. Cerletti started off by electrocuting dogs with 120 volts of electricity run though electrodes placed on the head and anus. Yes, he was able to provoke a seizure in half of the dogs…but the other half died from the voltage.             Hardly surprising, to a sane person.        Cerletti then heard that pigs were being given an electric shock to render them too compliant to struggle against having their throats slit, the conventional method then of slaughtering the animals. The chief veterinarian at a local slaughterhouse invited Cerletti to use the electric prods to perform his own experiments on the pigs.Cerletti was able to induce epileptic seizures in the animals, and they did not die from the voltage.        Perfect. He could now start experimenting on humans.       The “good doctor” then arranged one night for the police to bring in a poor soul they had found wandering around aimlessly in the streets of Rome. He had no known family or relatives. He could therefore be legitimately “diagnosed” as schizophrenic, Cerletti decided.         Realizing the need for secrecy to carry out the brutal treatment, Cerletti and his colleagues hid themselves in a basement room of the hospital and posted a guard outside to avoid detection. They lay the man on a bed, shaved his head, and stuck a plastic tube in his mouth so he didn’t crush his teeth with the ferocious biting they’d seen in animals as a result of such high voltage running through their bodies.        They attached two electrodes to the sides of the homeless man’s head and flipped a switch.        Eighty volts of electricity shot through his brain for a tenth of a second. His body contracted into a horrid spasm. Then it relaxed. No seizure. Cerletti’s assistant held his stethoscope over the man’s heart. He was still alive. The group breathed a sigh of relief.          “We need to increase the current,” Cerletti announced.              The second shock was 90 volts. The man’s body underwent a longer spasm, he turned pale for a second, and then his body relaxed. He took a deep breath.        But again, no seizure.        Suddenly the man sat up and said to the group around him, “Be careful! The first one was a nuisance. The second one was deadly.”        “This dose still is not sufficient to induce a seizure,” Cerletti said. “Shall we try again?”        A third shock was given at maximum voltage. The patient’s body went into a spasm, but this time it did not relax. Instead, a wave of spasms began and the man stopped breathing. The stethoscope was held to his chest as his heart began beating faster and faster. His face turned purple. His spasms continued for forty-eight seconds until he finally took one enormous breath and then collapsed.        “I can now assume that an electric current can induce a seizure in a man without risk,” Cerletti said.        On April 11, 1938 electroconvulsive therapy began its path of destroying lives. Much later in his life Cerletti realized the horror of the treatment he’d invented.        “When I saw the first patient’s reaction,” he wrote, “I thought to myself, ‘This ought to be abolished.’ Ever since I have looked forward to the time when another treatment would replace electroshock.”        Unfortunately, nothing has.        Since then millions of lives have been ruined by electroconvulsive “therapy” and more than a hundred thousand Americans are still electroshocked every year.        (This article is an excerpt from our free downloadable broadsheet Shock Therapy). Comments are moderated. You must be logged in to comment. Please keep it civil 

Scroll to Top