The shocking culprit behind America’s mass shooting crises

When I was young, people only started paying attention to presidential elections after Labor Day of the election year. Today, the campaigning and maneuvering begins in earnest after Labor Day the year before the election. And indeed, we’ve already heard a fair amount of noise from the candidates, all clamoring for attention.

A few medical and healthcare issues are even on display. But the level of hypocrisy, ignorance, illogic, and outright deception this time around about these issues is astounding.

The first issue is guns.

Candidates from one party seem proud to list the National Rifle Association as their personal public enemy No. 1. Bernie Sanders of the rural, hunting state of Vermont — whose energy and integrity can be admirable — is a little more reserved in his opposition.

But the other politically correct candidates cite guns as the big problem behind the tragic, ongoing episodes of mass violence around the country.

Of course, studies show cities with the most gun control laws actually suffer from the most gun violence. Plus, gun violence generally increases after more gun laws go into place. Furthermore, the worst violence always seems to occur in “gun free” zones, such as schools and movie theaters, where “crazed” shooters aren’t so crazy as not to know they won’t meet any armed opposition.

Turns out, these “crazed” shooters are also victims…victims of antidepressant drugs.

Politicians keep their friends close and their so-called “enemies” closer

I first observed the association between the antidepressant drugs and suicide years ago in my consulting forensic medicine practice. But in 2012, I was among the first to report about the association between antidepressant drugs and mass homicidal shootings around the world.

Yet none of the politically correct politicians ever talk about these drugs as part of the problem behind the violence. Oddly, they just had a perfect opportunity when listing their “enemies.”

Speaking of enemies, Hillary Clinton recently claimed health insurance companies and drug companies were also on her enemy list.

But nothing could be further from the truth.

During the first disastrous attempt at healthcare reform 20 years ago, Hillary led the negotiations as an unelected official. I personally witnessed how she locked everyone out of the room until after the health insurance companies had their say. Plus, she refused to hear from more than 1,000 natural practitioners we brought to Washington, D.C. to present true “alternatives” for real reform.

Health insurance companies and drug companies massively profited from every government intrusion into so-called healthcare “reform” since that day.

Drug companies get a free pass while the evidence continues to mount

These drugs clearly contribute to the epidemic of violence, but no politician will ever talk about it. In essence, politicians give drug companies real immunity from the harm caused by antidepressants.

While the dishonest debating continues, the prestigious British Medical Journal recently published a report explaining the link between antidepressant drugs and mass violence. Turns out, the link is even stronger than previously suspected.

Plus, the international health organization the Alliance for Natural Health just completed another analysis of dozens of the most high-profile incidents of mass violence over the past decades. Again, they found the perpetrators in the majority of these cases were taking antidepressant and/or anti-psychotic drugs.

Of course, the FDA requires antidepressant drugs now carry a “black box” warning about their association with violence (suicide and homicide).

But where does it get us?

Ideally, the FDA’s black box warning should be like going on “death row” for a drug. It should be last step before the FDA takes the drug off the market. But in far too many cases, the FDA issues the black box and the drug remains on the market for decades.

Granted, some antidepressants are safer than others. But the FDA won’t take any of the drugs off the market. Even the ones we know carry a 10 times higher risk of violence compared to other antidepressants.

And the problems associated with these drugs don’t stop at increased risk of violence.

Who’s really waging a “War on Women”?

As the FDA warns, antidepressants can cause heart problems, birth defects, anxiety, mania, psychosis, delusions, hallucinations, involuntary movements, sexual dysfunction, and even death. Many of these side effects might help provide an imaginative “insanity” defense in the homicide trials for these killers. Except the drug was supposed to stop the insanity in the first place.

Certain politicians also like to talk about a “war on women.” But with nearly one-third of women in their 40s and 50s taking these dangerous and debilitating drugs, who is really waging the war?

Politically correct politicians also talk out the need for mindless mass vaccinations. Apparently whether or not the vaccines work at all. Or whether or not you need them.

Thankfully, at least three Republican candidates — two of whom are licensed physicians — have raised legitimate scientific questions about current mass vaccination practices. I report on the dangers of these mass vaccinations in this month’s issue of my Insiders’ Cures newsletter. Subscribers can access that article (titled “Which vaccines do you really need?”) by logging on to my website,, with your username and password. (If you’re not yet a subscriber, now is the perfect time to get started.)

Politics aside, I will always stick to the science. Even when that means “sticking to my guns,” so to speak, and being politically incorrect.