General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAntidepressants to treat grief? Psychiatry panelists with ties to drug industry say yes
When should the bereaved be medicated? For years, the official handbook of psychiatry advised against diagnosing major depression when the distress is “better accounted for by bereavement.” Such grief, experts said, was better left to nature. But that may be changing...
In what some prominent critics have called a bonanza for the drug companies, the American Psychiatric Association this month voted to drop the old warning against diagnosing depression in the bereaved, opening the way for more of them to be diagnosed with major depression — and thus, treated with antidepressants.
The change in the handbook, which could have significant financial implications for the $10 billion U.S. antidepressant market, was developed in large part by people affiliated with the pharmaceutical industry, an examination of financial disclosures shows.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/antidepressants-to-treat-grief-psychiatry-panelists-with-ties-to-drug-industry-say-yes/2012/12/26/ca09cde6-3d60-11e2-ae43-cf491b837f7b_story.html?hpid=z2
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Catherina
(35,568 posts)for bereavement. That's all this boils down to, increasing the productivity of worker drones for corporate profit.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Response to SidDithers (Reply #2)
Post removed
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)maybe next time you'll get to 10 posts.
Say hi to your pals on Facebook.
Sid
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)anti-depressant for a short time after my mother died. It seemed to help him cope. She had been in poor health for several years and he was her primary care giver. I would not automatically condemn this use of medication.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)Jenoch
(7,720 posts)My dad is now 81, had a valve replaced, his appendix ruptured on his 79th birthday, but is now in good shape and loving life. The only thing bumming him out is that many of his friends are in poor health.
green for victory
(591 posts)I am beginning to believe that this will turn out to be one of the biggest scandals in US history.
Shoving barge loads of untested, serious hardcore psychotropic drugs down young peoples throats without adequate follow up.
In the middle of a "drug war". While those that find natural plants beneficial are arrested, jailed and have their assets confiscated. It was and is all about pharma- and bilking the masses out of whatever they can, by whatever means they can. See:Eli Lilly for example-
"On January 15, 2009 Eli Lilly pled guilty to a misdemeanor charge of illegally marketing Zyprexa for off-label use, and agreed to pay $1.4 billion.[4] Although Lilly had evidence that it is not effective for dementia, Zyprexa was marketed for elderly Alzheimer's patients.[5] The drug carries an FDA warning that it increases the risk of death in older patients with dementia-related psychosis.[6]...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olanzapine#Controversy.2C_lawsuits_and_settlements
StarryNite
(9,442 posts)Thanks for sharing this video.
AndSheGoesDown
(5 posts)Thank you. I've suffered from depression and after a year of taking Zoloft I was pretty much insane, stopped talking to all my friends, got way more suicidal and couldn't stop moving/shaking. I was quite delusional about some things and obsessed over my ex. I was a danger to myself and could've been a danger to others (In fact, I crashed my car more times than I can count, fortunately only against poles and walls. It was all from hyperactivity and poor cordination). This med brought on a chain of events that fucked my life for years, and some of it is permanent. These meds shouldn't be taken lightly.
dballance
(5,756 posts)I fear this will lead to over-prescribing them. We have rapidly become a country where we feel there must be a pill to fix everything.
I am happy I have a doctor who still doesn't just write a prescription for everything. The last time I was in his office I was diagnosed with bursitis. He told me to just get Aleave for the pain rather than writing me a prescription for some pain killer. You know what? He was dead on target. Taking the Aleave (actually a generic for it) as he instructed I did just fine. So while, yes, I did end up taking a pill or two it was simple OTC stuff and not a prescription for something like Vicoden or Percoset that would have most likely been much stronger than I needed and possibly impaired me.
My fear is doctors are going to feel more free to prescribe medication when it's not necessary. For thousands of years we've mourned the loss of loved ones and gotten through it. I'm just a little cautious about better living through pharmaceuticals.
Ms. Toad
(34,060 posts)but "simple OTC stuff" is not necessarily harmless and many should be monitored just as closely by doctors. Until relatively recently naproxen sodium (Aleve) was a prescription medication. I have had very serious side effects from it, will not ever take it again, and caution everyone I know who considers taking it. (I was taking it when it required a prescription, and it created extensive ulcers throughout my entire GI system - something which other NSAIDs I have taken regularly for my entire life have never done). Vicodin or Percocet (acetaminophen and hydrocodone) - or other NSAIDs - are, for me, much less dangerous.
Acetaminophen (an OTC drug), by itself, is much more deadly than the narcotic with which it is paired to make it a prescription drug. Taking less than twice the daily dosage of acetaminophen (anything over > 15 extra strength tablets in a single day - less than 2x the maximum daily dosage) can kill you, and even slightly more than the maximum daily dosage can kill you, as well. This woman died from taking 4500 mg/day for 3 weeks to relieve pain from a toothache (one pill a day over the max recommendation of 4000 mg/day).
Pharmaceuticals include OTC medications, which should be treated with just as much healthy respect as those which require a prescription, and all too often we assume that if it is available OTC it is harmless.
dballance
(5,756 posts)We tend to take for granted that just because we can buy it at our local grocery or pharmacy it must be safe.
Drugs often have a wide variety of effects on different people. Even the OTC ones. One should always be careful when first taking a drug whether it is by prescription or OTC.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)with the same respect
I don't think we'd criticize anyone for wanting to take an antihistamine for a runny nose.
And there are groups on DU who sing the praises of supplements from amino acids to zinc for helping you fight off viruses.
This fear of mental illness creeping into our lives by expansive pathologizing of 'common' discomforting emotions is curious
Maybe it's the spirits industry that would rather have us self-medicate with a bottle of 40 year old scotch or such
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)the desire to feel better.
Of course, there is all manner of ways to self-medicate for grief.
What do you have against people taking medications that can make them feel better?
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)other respiratory diseases, than car accidents, and than guns.
and that's from normal use, omitting deaths from physician or pharmacist error.
SSRIs have a lot of side effects. Prescribing them for normal grief is malpractice.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)symptoms rise to a level needing treatment?
So. Let me put something stupid in your mouth ...All people should NEVER take prescription medication because some people suffer severe side effects.
I really think this is as much about latent fear of mental illness. Seeing grief as NORMAL rather than as a departure from normal doesn't square with definitions of normal or definitions of pathological states.
Common doesn't mean normal. Grief is common so are head colds, both are departures from normal function.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)anything.
your analogy = big fail.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)You have your mind set
You refuse to accept my repeated statement that my analogy is of two usually subclinical conditions that cause discomfort.
Stick with your mind set. Don't try to understand more than you do. Protect your synapses from overload.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)effective than ssris for temporary dulling of emotional pain.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it"
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)Unless you've been subject to some kind of nerve damage or brain chemistry imbalance that has caused panic attacks or severe depression and actually tried medication for it and had the medication help you, then you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.
I have panic attack issues that were brought on by nerve damage after a bad ear infection. I take Celexa for it. It costs me about 5 bucks a month. And it works. It doesn't get me high. It doesn't do anything other than help prevent the attacks.
larwdem
(758 posts)people will never understand till it happens to them. I understand all to well!
I would not wish it on my worst fucking enemy
After my Mom passed I had a difficult time with my emotions to the point of where I couldn't stop crying. My Dr. put me on low dose of Zoloft and it calmed me down enough for me to cope and deal with her death. I was on it for 6 mo. and was monitred closely by my Dr. I'm off it now and I feel fine. Nothing can take away grief when you're dealing with heartbreak, but if you can at least take something to take the edge off so you're not hysterical and unable to function, I'm all for it. I know everyone is different and responds differently to medications, thats why it's important for Dr.'s to monitior these drugs so closely. In my case I was helped.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)but antidepressants used for a few months to give your system a kick start, and can enliven a depressed person to get back in the game. I don't think they should give them out like candy at funerals, mind you- but I've seen them do a lot of people good when nothing else worked. I've seen them help people make extraordinary, lasting changes after just doing them for six months to a year.
I wish they had invented prozac about 30 years earlier! My whole childhood would have been very different.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)in the population as a whole, their effect is similar to placebo, with lots of side effects.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)and facing the same fucked up problems through a haze the next day ad infinitum, you can join my brothers and their shot livers in the gutter.
Alcohol abuse is a much bigger problem, and living with alcoholics can be a damned good reason to need SSRIs.
Prescribing booze for real depression is fucking stupid.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)is not the only experience, your metabolism, mentality, reaction to these drugs is not the only reaction is now 'shaming'?
my my
grief is not 'depression'. grief is not a 'disease'.
not everyone who drinks becomes an alcoholic & antidepressants also cause liver damage.
and prescription drugs kill more people every year than alcohol. In *normal* usage, not counting medical error.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)even though I mentioned her, and them. But whatev.
Mom's depression started more than forty years ago, from intense grief form losing three of her children. Thirty plus years she suffered, tried all the older anti depressants available back then, and bam two months of prozac and she could act like a human being again and leave the house. She was already in the throes of Alzhemers and still deeply depressed. So, SSRIs are very different.
Like you, she sort of believed she deserved a grief filled life because it was her natural state.
She was wrong. She didn't know it could be any different until it was.
It's a shame my brothers tried to cure their sadness with the bottle, because every year it gets worse and brings more pain to all their loved ones. I'll be thrilled if they don't mow down any innocents before they die. I love drinking, but you don't feel better when the high goes away. Often it makes depression worse. It's classified as a depressant. We've all seen enough people crying and acting out of intensified grief while inebriated. So, dumb advice there.
And the 6-7 other people I know who take or took SSRIS for a period of time are coping and thriving. Every single one of them says they never imagined that they would have the lives they do know without it.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)of the other '6 to 7' people you cite.
TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)THis thread is making me sick. More shitting on people with mental illness. Anyone that has not suffered the utter hell of depression or anxiety or both has no damn room to talk. This is the exact stigmatizing BS from those that haven't a clue that keeps people from accepting much needed meds for mental illness and to want to get off of them far too soon when they finally accept them. It's this terrible and totally unwarranted stigma that made my mom refuse meds when my father died and she went into such a violent depression she stopped getting out of bed, and actually DID temporarily lose her marbles having no idea where she was or who she was or anything. That finally FINALLY convinced her to take the meds and it was a miraculous improvement. Yet because of that damn stigma she was constantly wanting to get off the meds even though she knew how very much they helped her and how desperate she was without them. SHe crucified herself on the alter of the stigma that went along with taking meds for mental/emotional issues. And for God's sake she was a nurse her whole life!
Good Lord, and here we have someone in here actually advocating self medicating with booze. Holy Mary and Joseph, there are just no words to describe how thoroughly fucked up and dangerous that is.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)"the black box warning" is bullshit. It ALREADY helped them. Shameless negation of everyone who was helped by this personal boogieman of yours. Totally out of line, repetitive fear mongering crap.
I hope your shaming techniques don't scare anyone away from getting the help they need.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)Then work on your reading skills. You seem to do more "reading into" than reading.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)...with mild medication, ie honey and lemon for my cold and sore throat.
You're suggesting that there's nothing wrong with using incredibly dangerous medications (which perform just barely better than placebos BTW) to treat another sub-clinical condition which is in fact best treated with a cuddle and some sympathy.
But:
easttexaslefty
(1,554 posts)But yourself.
It keeps me alive. I've tried many others things in the last 5 years. Everytime I stop taking an anti-depressant (3x) I suicide appempt. I guess finding your son dead hanging from a rope can do that. But, please, proceed.
TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)Speaking for yourself, just like the rare seat belt hater who gets ejected from a car wreck that immediately bursts into flame.
It works for you good. Just don't project your example onto the rest of the world.
maybe one day you will understand I hope not. The only way to understand, is if it happens to you
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)take anti-depressants are *not* significantly helped.
and grief, for all that you lot want to blur the boundaries, is *not* major clinical depression.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)psychiatric condition, is not clinical depression, and is not 'mental illness'.
2) I presume that one does not need to be a 'qualified medical professional' to cite findings from the scientific literature on a discussion board, any more than one needs to be a 'qualified medical professional' to make claims about 'brain chemistry' & fish oil on the same discussion board.
These people *are* qualified researchers:
Antidepressant Drug Effects and Depression SeverityA Patient-Level Meta-analysis
Journal of the American Medical Association: 2010;303(1):47-53. doi:10.1001/jama.2009
Context Antidepressant medications represent the best established treatment for major depressive disorder, but there is little evidence that they have a specific pharmacological effect relative to pill placebo for patients with less severe depression.
Objective To estimate the relative benefit of medication vs placebo across a wide range of initial symptom severity in patients diagnosed with depression.
Data Sources PubMed, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from January 1980 through March 2009, along with references from meta-analyses and reviews.
Study Selection Randomized placebo-controlled trials of antidepressants approved by the Food and Drug Administration in the treatment of major or minor depressive disorder were selected. Studies were included if their authors provided the requisite original data, they comprised adult outpatients, they included a medication vs placebo comparison for at least 6 weeks, they did not exclude patients on the basis of a placebo washout period, and they used the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS). Data from 6 studies (718 patients) were included.
Results Medication vs placebo differences varied substantially as a function of baseline severity. Among patients with HDRS scores below 23, Cohen d effect sizes for the difference between medication and placebo were estimated to be less than 0.20 (a standard definition of a small effect). Estimates of the magnitude of the superiority of medication over placebo increased with increases in baseline depression severity and crossed the threshold defined by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence for a clinically significant difference at a baseline HDRS score of 25.
Conclusions The magnitude of benefit of antidepressant medication compared with placebo increases with severity of depression symptoms and may be minimal or nonexistent, on average, in patients with mild or moderate symptoms. For patients with very severe depression, the benefit of medications over placebo is substantial.
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=185157
Why do I say that for most people, these medications don't provide significant benefit?
1. Most prescriptions are written for mild to moderate depression, not major depression.
2. A significant percentage (like up to half) of newly diagnosed patients stop medication within a brief window (like under 90 days) for various reasons, one of which is the perception that the medication is not helping. Similar phenomenon is seen in clinical tests through washout rates, etc.
http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=481753
Now, if I am unable to cite claims found in legitimate research on a discussion board without being asked for a medical license, why are others allowed to make claims about brain chemistry & fish oil without being asked for same?
And what kind of 'science' is it that attempts to stifle any & all discussion of legitimate research published in mainstream sources?
Thanks for asking. Are *you* a 'qualified medical professional'?
It would not make a damn bit of difference if I had PhDs in psychiatric medicine, neurology and pharmacology. You still wouldn't like anything I say, because you have a different opinion and weigh the evidence differently and you feel I am attacking *you* & *your experience* personally -- which I'm not.
This guy is a professor of psychiatry at Brown University, a 'qualified medical professional'. He says that 'chemical imbalance' isn't the cause of depression, at least in the simplistic form promulgated so widely, contra the experts here at DU. So if I post this video, am I 'dangerous?' Am I 'offering medical advice,' or 'forcing medical advice,' as i have been accused of doing here?
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7399368n
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)1) you are not qualified to make a statement about a subject you obviously know very little about.
2)
- one needs to be a qualified professional to be able to understand if the study they saw is what it seems to be.
- one needs to have a bit of integrity to mention that this one study might not be a definitive last word, might possibly be wrong and if possible offer a link to a study that presents a counter argument. I will assume that you did look at both sides of the argument before making up your mind.
For a non-qualified person (like me) I can offer a look at this article:
http://blogs.plos.org/mindthebrain/2012/12/26/the-antidepressant-wars-a-sequel-how-the-media-distort-findings-and-do-harm-to-patients/
It's written by: Adrian Preda MD is a psychiatrist and Health Sciences Professor of Psychiatry and Human Behavior at University of California Irvine School of Medicine.
Article presents both analysis of the study you mention and enough references to further have a look at the subject at hand. It also gives one an idea about questions one should ask when one looks at any study.
In regards to your claim that I take your posts as an attack on me and my personal experience.
My personal experience was "strong people don't need fucking drugs", "drugs don't work because everyone knows that", and "one can overcome everything if only one makes an effort". See, I was then just a shade better than you are now: I only believed that bullshit when it applied to myself, never for other people.
Because of my personal experiences I would welcome any and all kind of relief that can be offered to other people going through difficult time in their lives. I can not imagine anyone who went through major depressive episode or knows first hand what depressive illness is about would even think telling other people not to look for professional help. Unless of course they are scientologists or sadists like mother theresa.
On the other hand I would NEVER recommend anyone to self medicate with alcohol, like you do.
I can perfectly understand why someone might do it, will not judge them if they do, and will offer them support and beg them to please, please, please go get professional help before it is too late.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)said, as you read things into everything I post.
Second, you are not a 'qualified professional,' as you have said in this post. Yet you are making pronouncements on this matter right & left & claim to know what's true. So being a 'qualified professional' is apparently not a requirement for making claims in this forum.
You can cite evidence for your views, and I can cite evidence for mine. I have not asked for your credentials or attacked you personally. You have behaved differently toward me.
You don't know anything about my credentials or my personal experience.
I did not 'recommend' that anyone drink alcohol. I said alcohol dulls pain faster than antidepressants. That is my opinion, not a recommendation.
I did not offer any recommendations or opinions about whether of not people should 'seek professional help' for mental difficulties.
I didn't make any statement resembling the one you attribute to me, in quotes no less: 'strong people don't need fucking drugs'.
All those are things you invented out of whole cloth.
It is very tiresome.
are an ass, i hope it don't happen to you. you will take it bad
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)anything about me except that i disagree with you, & apparently that's enough for you to call me names.
& for that reason, *you* are the name you called me.
TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)However, as you essentially say everyone is not you, and you are not everyone.
The way we evolved, grief is one more opportunity to get the oxytocin flowing and keep the community bonded.
One of the worst things we've done for ourselves over the past few generations is physically isolate ourselves more and more from the people around us.
Simplistically, we'd (individual exceptions aside) need a hell of a lot fewer pills if we all took more oportunities to indulge in simple physical contact with a lot more people.
Skittles
(153,142 posts)my condolences
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Please don't listen to the anti-scientific and inhumane crap posted in this thread.
If you need to talk to anyone at any time of the day, day or night, PM me and I will PM you my phone number.
Again, I am so sorry.
Skittles
(153,142 posts)that poor gal
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)
I can't believe some of the comments posted here. It's just beyond the pale.
easttexaslefty
(1,554 posts)Colds don't usually kill.
Depression sure can.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)downandoutnow
(56 posts)your last line - "expansive pathologizing of 'common' discomforting emotions" - isn't that what the pill-pushing is doing?
It's normal to grieve, and even healthy. It's not healthy to deny and cover up that grief by pushing pills on it.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)American's common fear of mental illness and their abiding desire not to have feelings that they feel become symptoms of mental illness.
This same anxiety has been expressed for a number of the changes in the DSM-V
Intermittant explosive disorder got this treatment...it's one of the few APA approved disorders that actually deal with the "SNAPPING" that people think causes the CRAZIES to run off and hurt people.
It was also used as an argument about a syndrome surrounding emotional stress and menstruation...feminists were quite angry about it...but it turns out about 10% of women have problems with pms that interfere with their daily activities...one of the criteria for mental illness rising to a level requiring treatment.
There is absolutely no reason to believe that mental dysfunction doesn't follow the same range as other pathology including conditions that are usually sub-clinical.
And I don't see why no one is knocked for getting a cold remedy, but seeking a medicine for subclinical mental condition is bad unless it's booze
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)Departure from normal function is the classic standard for identifying a pathological condition.
People are not perpetually in a state of grief.
I am just guessing but I'd guess it they were in a perpetual state of grief you might recognize that as a psychological problem
Rather than looking at black and white changes of state, pathologists look pathology as a spectrum from mild to severe.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)YES I ADDED THE WORD
Because when I did, I suspected DURATION would make even your mind see that grief can be pathological.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)on for years.
this new ruling is not about that. it's about prescribing for *immediate* & *normal* grief. to help people deal with it, supposedly.
but not really.
Neoma
(10,039 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)reaction to other drugs.
stupid post. like if docs can't prescribe ssri's for people who just lost someone, they'll become alcoholics.
perfectly idiotic.
Neoma
(10,039 posts)I've had to sit through anti-addict crap because if it, and it's not stupid to observe that fact.
tama
(9,137 posts)people who self-medicate with substances that people have used for millenia for healing and spiritual experiences?
Or some state sanctioned officials and bureaucrats and legislators?
easttexaslefty
(1,554 posts)Count you LUCKY lucky stars you've never grieved someone so hard you cannot function it life. Can't sleep. Can't work. Don't bathe. Don't eat. Don't judge, be grateful as hell..
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)have always been free to prescribe for people whose grief goes on for years or becomes more than mere grief.
this latest isn't about that -- it's about handing out strong drugs for people who just lost someone, during the active grieving process.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)Certain medications as well as Fish oil, SAMe and various other
supplements have been documented to help HEAL the neurological
damage caused by grief, abuse and other biological conditions- Look it up.
I have for the last twelve years.
Until then, perhaps you should visit the mental health group and LEARN
about what some of us deal with on a daily basis.
Until you actually know what you are talking about, you may unintentionally
discourage some one from seeking much needed help, thus do more harm
than good in this discussion.
BHN
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)of course all new meds need to be carefully monitored and adjusted for dosage. Jeeze.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)that you make such a statement as though it has major significance tells me that you don't know as much about this subject as you think you do.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)Many people have offered you intelligent and
thoughtful points on this thread- you have the sensitivity
of a box of nails and the willingness to learn of a dead cactus.
May your life continue to be a state of complete denial and
never be touched by life altering loss.
I actually feel nothing but sorry for you HPD.
BHN
postrinserepeat....
(6 posts)That just shows how much you know! Runny nose= mucus. Mucus is the body's intelligence at work! It is detoxifying the system through excess mucus! To take something is effing stoopid and suppresses it further. This is why people get a cold, run to the doc, and end up with something lasting a month or longer!
While there may be definite instances where meds are indicated (in acute situations), the vast, vast majority of cases are part of being in the Material World.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)is just another form of bullying imo.
TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)...anti-biotics for a cold?
I don't care what YOU take for YOUR cold PROVIDE it doesn't bite ME on the arse.
BUT exactly why the fuck shouldn't people be criticised for taking patently useless cold remedies, when they TIME AFTER TIME refuse to take the one prescribed remedy ABSOLUTELY PROVEN to reduce the duration and severity of a cold.
A FUCKING BREAK.
downandoutnow
(56 posts)All these head pills are really messing people up.
And I'm completely NOT opposed to people chemically altering their mental states - OCCASIONALLY. You want to get drunk and/or high now and then? Be my guest! The desire to get high is a normal human thing, JUST as being sad ("depression'"
or having changes of mood ("manic-depressive" or being bored ("ADD" are.
But at least when you get DRUNK or smoke some WEED it's a TEMPORARY chemical change. You really need to be a world-class alcoholic or pothead to be constantly drunk or stoned. For most of us, it's a few hours thing. But the way pills are pushed at people, people are supposed to be CONSTANTLY under their influence.
And these pills really do a number on people's internals - their kidneys and stomach linings, for example. I know a woman who has been a pill-popper for most of her adult life. She's only 39 now. A few years ago she was the queen of curves - the good kind of curves. Well she's gone from 145 lbs to 125 lbs to close to 100 now I think, because eating is painful for her - her stomach lining is shot. If she can make it to 50, she'll be lucky.
undeterred
(34,658 posts)Treating it with antidepressants is a way of medicalizing it. It is normal to go through a grieving process after losing a loved one and you cant shorten or circumvent it with medication. While it can help someone cope, it feels like this is just a way of denying something which is really a natural part of life.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)And some people don't deal with those chemical processes as well as others. For some, it can even be crippling. There is absolutely nothing wrong with taking medication to deal with those symptoms so one can go on maintaining their life.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)than placebo. and have a hell of a lot of side effects, including death.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)don't meet the criteria for "severe" depression; and very severe depression is the only kind of depression for which SSRIs show any benefit above placebo.
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=185157
And once again, BEREAVEMENT is not SEVERE CLINICAL DEPRESSION.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)and when it does, it should be prescribed if the patient is interested in getting over it.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)depression,' it's about changing the standards of care to prescribe to the newly bereaved.
Now tell me what the scientific test is to distinguish 'serious clinical depression' from new bereavement. I'm all ears.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)As I said downthread, you are ignorant of what you speak of. You are out of your depth.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)phleshdef
(11,936 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)bullshit' and I will defend it from the scientific literature.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)idwiyo
(5,113 posts)
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)Emotions are chemical reactions. We are biological machines and everything we experience is related to chemicals and the brains interpretation of such things.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)My comment was in response to the post below written by HiPointDem:
81. and chemical processes are emotional in nature. and ssri's are no more effective, in aggregate,
than placebo. and have a hell of a lot of side effects, including death.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)idwiyo
(5,113 posts)emotions do feel more like electromagnetic fields than molecules... 
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)shintao
(487 posts)In many countrys a death is celebrated and enjoyed, while here christians who should rejoice a passing, start crying even though the person gets everlasting life. I guess their faith is weak
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)don;t grieve.
bullshit all around.
TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)...idea that public displays of grief beyond quiet sobbing (and then only at the funeral) are somehow offensive.
What's bullshit is the idea that we should keep emotions bottled up to the point where people either hit the bottle, or each other.
Religion, inasmuch as it has affected and directed our culture has PLENTY to do with it.
Yeah there was a cheap shot in there, but I can't say it was entirely undeservered.
Other cultures, other religions deal with grief by calling upon the entire emotional spectrum. Shintao isn't saying other cultures don't feel grief, but that they deal with it by calling upon the entire emotional spectrum.
In Anglo Christian culture so called negative feelings are considered WRONGFUL and deserving of supression.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)cultures' also have religion. and most of what americans supposedly *know* about 'other cultures' is second-hand, highly romanticized, over-generalized to the point of falsehood.
Jennicut
(25,415 posts)While they are easy to start, coming off some of them can be excruciating. Especially Lexapro. Never start that stuff without being prepared to have severe lows coming down off of it, nausea, brain zaps, etc. Lovely stuff. I started Celexa after that and have no problems if I miss a day or two, Lexapro you felt sick when you did not take it the exact time every day.
I would urge people to try and cope without the antidepressants but if they are just in a permanent funk the antidepressants (SSRI's or selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors ) do raise the levels of serotonin in your brain and may make you feel better. Some people can handle grief and some people will just be stuck in total depression long term. My depression started in high school and is a long term thing tied to pms called PMDD (Premenstrual dysphoric disorder). I get severe depression during my period so I am pretty much stuck on the meds longterm. It has been a long 16 year ride since I was about 21. Zoloft, Prozac, Paxil, Lexapro, Celexa. I have been on them all.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)I've had some panic attack issues, likely brought on by nerve damage in my inner ear. Celexa has helped tremendously and its not something that gets you high. People are so ignorant about these sorts of things. The fact of the matter is, your nervous system and the brain chemistry involved with it are physical things that can be damaged or subject to dysfunction just as much as a heart or pancreas or any other organ or body part. Being 100% against anti-anxiety and anti-depression medication is no different than being against blood pressure medication.
Ms. Toad
(34,060 posts)My daughter is currently on medical leave from college in large part because of the disastrous side effects of Celexa.
She is one of the few people who experienced the paradoxical side effect that it created hypersexuality. She is, to our knowledge, currently free of STIs. But at the point at which she was told by a friend of a friend that she had been exposed but not by whom so she couldn't ask to what she had been exposed, she weaned herself off of it and withdrew from college because of the combined effect of unmedicated depression and dealing with the potential that she had acquired one or more STIs, the treatment for which would be incompatible with her underlying medical conditions. We have a few more months before we are outside the seroconversion period for HIV.
She had an idiot for a psychiatrist, who abandoned her while she was on Celexa (he literally stopped returning her phone calls and refused to set up an appointment to replace the one he didn't bother to show up for). So she was not being actively cared for when the hypersexuality developed, and it took a few months (and a serious wake-up call) before I could convince her it might be connected to celexa.
She needs medical assistance for her depression (which was triggered by diagnosis at age 19 with a condition that at the time of diagnosis had a prognosis of 10 years to death or transplant). Although we have finally found a replacement psychiatrist who is competent, she is scared to death to try another because of the disastrous consequences of this one. And, on top of depression and a life threatening underlying physical condition, she still, for a few more months, has to deal with the potential of HIV, and with the emotional consequences of engaging in sexual activity she would not have chosen to engage in but for the influence of Celexa (all of her sexual experiences, ever, were under the influence of Celexa).
These drugs are necessary for some people - perhaps even many people. My daughter is one of them. But they are not something which should be undertaken lightly or without close monitoring by someone who is well versed in all of the known side effects and who is committed to assisting in finding the right match for the person who needs them. Far too many doctors give them out like candy - and far too many are prescribed by GPs rather than psychiatrists with specialized training. Just as I would not want my GP performing surgery of any significance on me, I also don't want him in charge of initiating and stabilizing pharmaceutical management of depression, anxiety, or bipolar disorders (just to name a few which are treated by SSRIs).
TexasBushwhacker
(20,167 posts)For depression, a combination of the right medication and therapy is best.
Jennicut
(25,415 posts)It was really horrible for that psychiatrist to abandon your daughter like that. I have had no side effects on Celexa but I have had bad experiences with some others. Just feeling disconnected, a zombie like feeling on Zoloft. And the instant withdrawal feelings on Lexapro.
Chronic depression just all around sucks and not many people understand it. It is not simply temporary grief. Real depression means you literally cannot function and border on suicide, at least it did for me. I was really at my lowest in college, before I started the meds. But I have tried lots of different kinds. I am doing much better these days, married with two little girls. I kind of had no hope in my early twenties but at 37 I handle things pretty well. I did find a really nice psychologist and that was key.
I wish your daughter all the luck in the world. My parents have been incredible for me. You sound like you are an amazing parent.
Ms. Toad
(34,060 posts)Doctors without adequate specialized training write prescriptions as if there are no serious side effects - and as if everyone responds the same way. Antidepressants aren't as predictable or innocuous as antibiotics, or medications for physical pain - either in how they work or what side effects they have.
I'm trying to be a good parent - the last few months, before we figured out that her really risky behavior was driven by celexa it has been hard to keep the lines of communication open because it was so hard to draw the line between permitting her to exercise her right as an adult to make her own decisions - but to make it clear that it was beyond my emotional capacity to enable her to make decisions that were risky (in a life threatening way). When the risks got to that level, one of the first things I did was to call on all my friends with connections to mental health resources to identify counselors experienced in helping young adults with chronic illnesses negotiate healthy decision making - then back off so she could have frank conversations with someone not so emotionally involved. That seems to have been successful, since she's been willing to drive a hour weekly to continue that relationship. And, more generally, sometimes I get the sense from her I'm succeeding - other times not. But we're still talking, and she still says she needs her family. So I figure I'm at least close to the right balance.
It is good to hear from someone a few years past where she is now! Thanks!
TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)That's why there are such a huge variety of different anti-depressants and anti-anxiety meds. I despised Zoloft but my sister did great on it. She despised Paxil but my mother did great on it. Everyone's body responds differently to any kind of meds, and it can be some work finding the one for each individual that both works well enough for them and with no side effects or at least mild ones that they can cope with. I was very lucky in that the first one I was prescribed worked for me with only some bloating and constipation as a side effect.
But when a HUGE crisis comes along - like my father's death - it wasn't working enough. At first we increased the dosage but not only did it not seem to make any real difference I got so horribly constipated I seriously thought I'd NEVER crap again. So, I tried several different meds all of which were utter duds either because they made me feel like a zombie, the just didn't seem to work at all, or the side effects were just too horrible to cope with (I never felt so shitty than when I took that damn Zoloft and it didn't do anything but make me feel completely devoid of any emotions at all). So, I went back to the original med I had always taken and by that time the worst of my grief that through me into a crisis was over with enough that my regular dosage was ok for awhile and after about a year just fine again.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)...or some other condition that isn't related to anxiety or depression. Medications for anxiety and depression are no different. Some people just don't handle certain medications well.
I hope your daughter finds the treatment that is right for her. I've never had a depression problem myself, just panic attacks. So I can only speak from that side of it and as far as that goes, Celexa has helped keep them at bay pretty well. I'm also not being prescribed a particularly high dosage.
Ms. Toad
(34,060 posts)which don't deliberately mess with your mind.
They don't act nearly as predictably as medications which treat common physical conditions - and the side effects can be much more insidious (as hers was) and less obvious.
That is the nature of the response to SSRIs. My response was not to whether SSRIs can be helpful - but even when they are helpful (as celexa was for my daughter) they can also be dangerous in ways that medications to treat common physical conditions are not because they deliberately change how your mind works. Her harmful side effect was not dangerous to anyone other than herself. As the film linked to in this thread indicated - for some people the side effects can make changes which drive emotions that result in the owner harming others, as well. For this reason they should never be treated as innocuous, and need to be monitored very carefully by someone who knows what they are doing.
I am glad celexa worked for you. I don't know that it is working for my spouse because she is not actually depressed (and never was - it was prescribed for diagnostic purposes and she continues to take it because she believes it helps her sleep and she has a doctor willing to prescribe it) - but it is at least not having any negative side effects (but it is not, and was never properly medically monitored for her). I was reacting to your description of it as innocuous.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)Because my understanding is that the more severe side effects are quite rare when compared to the overall population of patients using the drug. Thats why I said its inoffensive. Most people who use it DON'T experience any really bad, long lived side effects.
The worst it ever did to me was make me drowsy the first week or so. I wouldn't consider that a severe side effect at all.
Ms. Toad
(34,060 posts)it is the severity of the consequences, and their insidious nature that is the reason they need to be carefully monitored by someone extremely well versed in all of the known potential side effects. The particular side effect my daughter experienced is rare, but known. Had her doctor been monitoring it carefully and asking the proper questions it would have been identified before she made a date with someone she "met" via an internet dating service designed to support hook-ups, and went to meet him in a hotel, 100+ miles from anyone who could rescue her if his intentions were other than casual sex. That was the first of the compulsive hypersexual behavior - it got worse.
Many, perhaps even most, people react as you did - but when they don't the consequences can have an extremely high cost that may not be recognized until it does severe damage either to the person using the medication or (occasionally) by that person to others. It took a long time before the medical community realized that teens were committing suicide because of the anti-depressants - not because of the underlying depression- because the influence of the anti-depressant on the mind was hard to distinguish from how a depressed mind works.
My point is that monitoring of the first few years of anti-depressant use should be monitored by someone extremely well versed in the known side effects -not because the disastrous ones happen frequently, but because when they happen they are disastrous.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)And I had no drugs or medication at all in my system. None. I'm married and totally monogamous now, but at that age, that was totally what I was into.
Are you certain celexa caused it and it wasn't just some kind of phase?
Ms. Toad
(34,060 posts)That is what she suspected (although even from the beginning she realized there was some compulsion to it) - although it was so totally out of character for anything previous in her experience that incident set off red flags for me (particularly since I am a rape survivor - and she was, at the time, a counselor at the college's rape crisis center).
That incident (and several related ones ) scared her enough that she sought counseling (with my help to locate a counselor) to help her sort out making better decisions regarding risks - and has been investing more than 3 hours a week to drive to and from counseling. At that point, she associated it with living with a very severe chronic illness - she was so dead inside that the only time she felt anything was when the thrill of the risk broke through. But the more recent behavior having compulsive unprotected sex with enough men that she does not know the source or nature of her exposure to STIs - scared the crap out of her. She took herself off of celexa without even consulting me abouther suspicions (and without medical supervision because her doctor had abandoned her - but her lack of control over what was going on scared her enough that she felt she couldn't wait until her psychologist could identify someone accepting new patients and on our insurance). Once she was off it for 3 month the drive and compulsion vanished - but in the mean time it has taken more than 2 months to clean up the routine STIs and related infections, and we have to wait another for to be sure she is clean on HIV, and she has taken a medical leave from college until she gets things under her control (her decision - she called after the decision was already made).
Now that it is out of her system, she actually tracks back the thread of this particular side effect even farther than I would (to activities which seem quite within the normal college range of sexual activity from my perspective - even taking into account her personal hisotry).
Long answer - but I think it points out exactly why this needs to be carefully supervised because it is so hard to distinguish (in her case) normal young adult behavior, or increased sexual appetite because the medication treated the depression, from compulsive hypersexuality created by the celexa. In others (particularly teenagers) suicidal thoughts because of the depression are hard to distinguish from suicidal thoughts because of the medication - one reason it took so long for them to realize that depressed teens on anti-depressants were more likely to commit suicide than depressed teens not on anti-depressants.
When the medication is designed to alter how you think and feel, and the harmful side effects are alterations of how you think and feel, it isn't as easy as objectively watching your blood pressure in response to taking ibuprofen, or watching for hives in response to antibiotics.
I'm not at all critical of using anti-depressants as part of care for depression - despite how terrifying the last few months have been as a parent, it is clear to me that the depression is beyond anything which can be handled without medication. At this point, it is my daughter who is reluctant to try a different anti-depressant because of the impact celexa had on her. I am just very clear that these are not medications which should be routinely handed out by GPs like candy, as they are way too often now.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)DUers pride themselves on embracing science, until it comes to things like this and then it looks like a Scientology tent revival.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)well said. 
Sid
Jennicut
(25,415 posts)It has really stopped the monthly depression in it's tracks and I have had no real side effects on it. I am for people getting help if they need it. I know all to well what depression can do to a person.
easttexaslefty
(1,554 posts)I know it does a number on my body but it ( mostly) keeps me from having suicidal ideaition. Everyday I can be present and alive for my surviving son & husband, is a good day.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)side effects and risks.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)Theres a reason these medications are suppose to be prescribed by a doctor. Doctor's are suppose to have you start a medication with such warnings on light doses and make sure they have you back in for observation after you've been on them for a bit.
Regardless. Nerve damage is REAL. Brain chemistry dysfunctions are REAL. Panic disorder caused by such things actually does happen. And some SSRIs bring a lot of relief to a lot of people with a lot of people not experiencing the most extreme side effects. Everyone's body is different and some people can't handle certain drugs, whether it be an anxiety/depression medication or a medication related to some other VERY REAL medical condition.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)have black box warnings.
I have never denied that ssris 'bring a lot of relief to a lot of people'.
Yes, nerve damage is real, but not sure what that has to do with anything.
Again, I ask you to show me the physical evidence of 'brain chemistry dysfunction'.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)Stop playing stupid. There are plenty of merit-filled studies where brain chemicals have been studied for imbalance. You can use the fucking google yourself. I'm not holding your hand on such mundane shit. You don't need me to show you anything. Thats just an excuse you are cowering behind to avoid facing the fact that you are seriously losing an argument.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)phleshdef
(11,936 posts)http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4215298.stm
And my personal favorite condition...
http://www.psychweekly.com/aspx/article/articledetail.aspx?articleid=547
Took 2 minutes of my life that I'll never get back. Now stop hiding behind that BS.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)paper discussed isn't named or linked, but using the date, I found it.
This is the abstract, which claims much less than the popularized summary and the supposed quote from the researcher does. As is common with popularized summaries.
High Vesicular Monoamine Transporter Binding in Asymptomatic Bipolar I Disorder: Sex Differences and Cognitive Correlates
Jon-Kar Zubieta, M.D., Ph.D. et al.
OBJECTIVE: It has been hypothesized that anomalies in monoaminergic function underlie some of the manifestations of bipolar disorder. In this study the authors examined the possibility that trait-related abnormalities in the concentration of monoaminergic synaptic terminals may be present in patients with asymptomatic bipolar disorder type I.
METHOD: The concentration of a stable presynaptic marker, the vesicular monoamine transporter protein (VMAT2), was quantified with (+)[11C]dihydrotetrabenazine (DTBZ) and positron emission tomography. Sixteen asymptomatic patients with bipolar I disorder who had a prior history of mania with psychosis (nine men and seven women) and individually matched healthy subjects were studied. Correlational analyses were conducted to examine the relationship between regional VMAT2 binding, cognitive function, and clinical variables.
RESULTS: VMAT2 binding in the thalamus and ventral brainstem of the bipolar patients was higher than that in the comparison subjects. VMAT2 concentrations in these regions correlated with performance on measures of frontal, executive function. In addition, sex differences in VMAT2 binding were detected in the thalamus of the bipolar patients; the male patients had higher binding than the women. No sex differences in binding were observed in the healthy comparison group.
CONCLUSIONS: These initial results suggest that higher than normal VMAT2 expression and, by extension, concentration of monoaminergic synaptic terminals, may represent a trait-related abnormality in patients with bipolar I disorder and that male and female patients show different patterns. Also, VMAT2 concentrations may be associated with some of the cognitive deficits encountered in euthymic bipolar disorder.
Summary of the full paper in plainer english:
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=174373
It's hypothesized (got that, *hypothesized*?) that brain chemical (monoamine, e.g. serotonin, dopamine, etc.) abnormalties underlie bipolar disorder. Researchers used a radioactive tracer to label one monoamine transport protein (VMAT2) & examine binding at various binding sites via PET scan.
Subjects were 16 non-symptomatic people with a bipolar diagnosis and 16 matched non BP controls. Multiple pet scans were done on each person, focused on different binding areas. Readings were 'normalized' then 'averaged', then right & left hemisphere values were again averaged to obtain a single value.
"Statistical significance was set at p<0.05." (p.05 significance means, vulgarly, 5% probability the observed correlation is random).
Here's the data: only two measures achieved statistical significance at p.05 or more, after 'normalization', and they don't tell you the level of significance (so it's probably just at .05.)
*The only difference between subjects and controls was in binding potential in the thalamus and ventral midbrain (2/5 sites measured)
*No difference in proportion of unmetabolized tracer or rate of transport.
There was no correlation between binding scores and any clinical measures or clinical diagnostic tests given prior to imaging: No correlation with:
- Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score
- Young Mania Rating Scale score
- numbers of hospitalizations for depression and mania
- numbers of episodes of depression and mania
- years of illness
- Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale ratings
- years of exposure to mood stabilizers, antidepressants, and antipsychotic drugs
- blood levels of mood stabilizers before imaging.
The only correlations between binding scores and clinical tests were with a card-sorting test and tests of immediate recall, colors, and words. In other words, tests of general cognitive function.
Furthermore, a 32-person study can only be suggestive in the first place; it's too small to be definitive. And these findings are barely suggestive; the researchers detail various problems, uncertainties, etc., one of which is that the tracer is not specific and VMAT2 transports multiple monoamines. Another (though the researchers minimized this) is that all the bipolar patients were on "one or more" psych drugs: valproic acid, N=12; lithium, N=7; carbamazepine, N=2; lamotrigine, N=1, olanzapine, N=1; thiothixene, N=2.
So you can't have it both ways. If these drugs affect one's 'brain chemistry,' then they affect any measurements of 'brain chemistry' taken while on them. The measurements are of bipolar patients on psych drugs, not drug-naive bipolar patients.
So what is it that you think this study 'proves'?
You'll forgive me if I don't go through each of the links you posted. It actually takes some time to read the studies instead of the popularized versions.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)...does not make it any less valid.
It proves that there are accepted scientific consensus that brain chemistry can become unbalanced, causing things not to function correctly in various ways.
I don't even need a study to prove that though. Common sense dictates that if other body chemistry processes that become upset, such as hormones or insulin resistance or adrenaline production, then the ones related to your neurons can also be subject to the same phenomena.
I don't give a fuck about your copy/paste wall of text. Thats a transparent attempt to drown out the conversation and give you something else to hide behind.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)which your summary doesn't.
let the record show that you consider looking at the actual research 'an attempt to drown out the conversation'.
lol. only if the so-called 'conversation' consists of you & others shouting 'dangerous! scientologist! show me your credentials! woo!'
people that actually care about science and truth don't act that way.
and then you cite 'common sense'. rotfl.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)Despite the multitude of scientific evidence that does in fact say otherwise. I don't think you need to be lecturing anyone about "caring about science and truth".
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)and anyone who does can see it.
just another witch-hunter.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)At least the part about brain chemistry being subject to dysfunction. You know I'm right too. You are just lying at this point.
And I don't care much about proving you wrong as you do about fake proving yourself right. You are fairly irrelevant and no expert.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)"That theory (of chemical imbalance) is a gross oversimplification & probably not correct...if (monoamines like serotonin) have anything to do with depression it's a minor role...they're not the cause of depression, I think we know that now..."
I never claimed to be an expert, btw. But I do claim to keep up with the actual scientific literature to a greater degree than the average person.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)He also said that the way the theory is stated is wrong, thus not declaring the entire theory wrong. And he did acknowledge neuron related chemicals playing a role in setting the stage for depression.
This article from Harvard Medical School pretty much makes a similar point but elaborates.
"It’s often said that depression results from a chemical imbalance, but that figure of speech doesn’t capture how complex the disease is. Research suggests that depression doesn’t spring from simply having too much or too little of certain brain chemicals. Rather, depression has many possible causes, including faulty mood regulation by the brain, genetic vulnerability, stressful life events, medications, and medical problems. It’s believed that several of these forces interact to bring on depression.
To be sure, chemicals are involved in this process, but it is not a simple matter of one chemical being too low and another too high. Rather, many chemicals are involved, working both inside and outside nerve cells. There are millions, even billions, of chemical reactions that make up the dynamic system that is responsible for your mood, perceptions, and how you experience life."
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)Dr: I think the causes of depression remain a mystery.
CBS: So what about this idea that it's a chemical imbalance? I've always heard that, we don't have enough serotonin, we don't have enough neurotransmitters; are you saying that's a theory & people don't know whether it't true? are you saying it's been discredited?
Dr: That's a theory that's been around since the late 50s & early 60s. That theory has guided the pharmaceutical industry in discovering new drugs for depression because they look for new drugs that change these neurochemicals. But the theory is probably incorrect. And we're just beginning to know that although I think it's still widely taught in medical schools, the idea that there's not enough serotonin or norepinepherine in the brain and a lot of people including psychiatrists & other health professionals believe it. But the experts in the field, the academic psychopharmacologists, for example, the people who do research on drugs, now believe that that theory is a gross oversimplification & probably is not correct.
CBS: And the whole idea of antidepressants is built around this theory.
Dr: Yes it is.
CBS: You're saying the theory is wrong.
Dr. It's either completely wrong, or it's certainly wrong in the original way it was stated, that these so-called neurotransmitters like serotonin & norepinepherine, dopamine -- these are substances that create signals in the brain & stimulate neurons to fire -- if they have anything to do with depression it's probably of a minor role & sets the stage for depression, but they're not the cause of depression. I think we know that now.
As for your quote from Harvard. It says *nothing* though perhaps you don't understand that.
To be sure, chemicals are involved in this process, but it is not a simple matter of one chemical being too low and another too high. Rather, many chemicals are involved, working both inside and outside nerve cells. There are millions, even billions, of chemical reactions that make up the dynamic system that is responsible for your mood, perceptions, and how you experience life.
To say there are 'millions & billions" of chemicals that make up the system that creates mood, perceptions, & life experience is an admission that they don't know the cause of depression & they don't know what anti-depressants are really doing.
It's like saying "millions & billions" of chemical reactions make you a human instead of a monkey, make you about to raise your arm, make you have blonde hair & white skin.
It is a statement at the very lowest level of knowledge possible.
There is not one piece of research, despite 60 years of trying, that has shown any regular, replicable, testable correlation between 'brain chemicals' & any mental illness, let alone 'depression'.
In other words, you can't look at 'brain chemicals,' neurotransmitter levels, or any such thing, & distinguish between supposed 'bipolar' or 'depressed' or 'schizophrenic' people, or people with any mental label, and tell them from supposed 'normal' people.
Despite 60 years of trying, and despite all your denials that it ain't so -- it *is* so.
Smilo
(1,944 posts)we are given three days off, if we are lucky, to attend to the funeral, etc. of a close loved one and then expected to pick up where we left off before they died. And heaven help those who need more time.
What those who are grieving need is not drugs, but a shoulder to lean on, to cry against, a person willing to listen again and again and again and to be supported in their journey of bereavement.
For many it takes at least a year to understand their loss and begin to function - not get over - I don't belief you can ever get over the death of a loved one - because their will always be reminders of them every day.
What a great uncaring society we have become - what a sad reflection when paid psychiatrists put their greed above the actual needs and correct treatment of their patients.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)of death.
the experience imo makes you both harder & more tolerant.
dflprincess
(28,075 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)ad do, like you... they should live with it.
because ssris are dangerous for everyone, even the people who have had no health problems and are thrilled they have their lives back.
tama
(9,137 posts)who come to sing and cry at certain situations such as funerals etc. The value of social and communal level participating in the grieving process and not leaving someone to grief alone is much underestimated.
AndyA
(16,993 posts)They just want to make our lives better. That's why they make a pill for everything! Oh, and just ignore those side effects, they really aren't that bad, and only a very few people are effected by them. And, know that most of them won't kill you (hopefully).
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)There are some really ignorant people who like to criticize antidepressants and antianxiety medications. These are people that have no clue what they are talking about.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)phleshdef
(11,936 posts)idwiyo
(5,113 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)blah-blah-blah" -- as if your personal experience were the only fucking experience in the world.
Confusious
(8,317 posts)that there experience don't matter a whit, while your personal experience is the only "fucking" one that matters.
There's a word for that.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)not the *only* experiences.
I can go on any medical chatboard & find literally hundreds of people with experiences 180 degrees different than yours, & i can go into the medical literature and finds studies that are not in accord with your experience or views.
What is actually happening here is that some people can't stand to hear it and find it threatening, for some reason.
also that some people can't distinguish between BEREAVEMENT & clinical depression.
I AM NOT THE PERSON THAT CALLED OTHERS 'IGNORANT' BECAUSE THEY DISAGREED WITH ME. I am not the person who told others to shut up unless they agreed with me. I am not the person who accused others of 'harming' people because they didn't agree with me.
Confusious
(8,317 posts)you're coming off as an asshole in dismissing their experiences. ( yes, that's how it looks. Don't play the semantics game)
1 in 10 take the medications. Which means I could find millions who will say it helped them. I'm among those. It's helped me immensely.
I've noticed the people who they don't work on don't have the problems in the first place.
They shouldn't have been on the drugs. They were unhappy, and didn't want to take the time to find out why. They wanted a quick fix.
The drugs aren't a quick fix. If you have a problem, they only get you to the point you can start fixing. You have to do the rest yourself.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)standards.
then i got a phalanx of people who insisted on confusing their own 'mental illness' with NORMAL BEREAVEMENT.
I wonder why doctors are prescribing major psych drugs to people who just want a 'quick fix' for their 'unhappiness' in the first place.
Don't you?
Unhappiness is not clinical depression, either.
Confusious
(8,317 posts)If it goes on for more then 10 years. A couple of years even.
I tended to perk up if things changed, and even if my life was going well, I tended to start slipping back down into the black pit.
Depression isn't a yes/no answer, where you are depressed or you aren't. There are different levels of depression.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)and lack of distinction between clinical depression and unhappiness, bereavement, sadness, etc. is a big part of the problem.
Confusious
(8,317 posts)I've seen enough shrinks to know, and suffered through it myself.
It's depression.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)pathological or due to problems with 'brain chemistry'. not all of them render a person unable to go to work, care for their family, clean their house, etc.
unhappiness is not synonymous with clinical depression. it is interesting that you see it as synonymous, though.
Confusious
(8,317 posts)This cluster of symptoms (syndrome) was named, described and classified as one of the mood disorders in the 1980 edition of the American Psychiatric Association's diagnostic manual. The term "depression" is ambiguous. It is often used to denote this syndrome but may refer to other mood disorders or to lower mood states lacking clinical significance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_depressive_disorder#Clinical_assessment
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)Ignorance is not knowing. And when you speak on something without knowing anything about it, that means you are wrong. You are wrong about this topic.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)don't believe it is because what i'm saying contradicts your own beliefs, knowledge and experience.
If I'd been in 3 mental hospitals and had a PhD in pharmacology, neurology & psychiatric medicine I doubt it would change your belief in the least, and you would be no more interested in anything I had to say than you are right now. You would simply write me off as an outlier, dissident, whackjob, etc.
I've offered to debate the scientific literature -- but so far, no takers.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)I'm just not taking you serious. You've said nothing that earns any kind of serious regard.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)And I couldn't care less about your serious regard.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)if you think that's looney, too bad.
and as you have *no* argument but "you're looney!! you're a scientologist!! tom cruise, nyah nyah!!"
....i'll leave you to it. it's boring.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)Just as PTSD can be brought on by some kind of extreme anxiety experience.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)so happy for your grand mom.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)I often wonder if they apply this sort of superstitious thinking to the drugs they encounter, or if it's only what those "other people" take which is part of the big pharma conspiracy to rob us of our souls (Kodak failed to capture them all with their magic cameras).
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)I'll take a guess that majority of people who yap about how "it's all natural", and "you'll get over it" have not a friggin slightest idea WTF they are talking about.
Either that or misery really likes company and they just can't stand the idea that someone else might get professional help instead of trying to deal with grief the same way they did.
If medication helps someone to deal with grief than great! I would much prefer they get professional help, and get better faster than go though the same shit I had to go though.
PS some of the responses to this OP remind me about that bitch mother theresa and her opinion about painkillers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)I agree, it's self centered bullshit.
"they just can't stand the idea that someone else might get professional help instead of trying to deal with grief the same way they did. "
LWolf
(46,179 posts)difference between the two. Depression can be a part of grieving.
I suffered a major loss in 2000. I was grieving. I was also depressed. I was grieving for what I'd lost, and grieving for what appeared to me to be a very bleak future, moving on with half a lifetime to live with that loss.
I couldn't sleep. I struggled to function. At the 4-6 week mark, my doctor prescribed Paxil.
It didn't make the grief go away, or shorten the grieving process. I was still depressed. It did allow me to get a few hours of sleep, and to function well enough to get through the days. I took it for 3-4 months, and then was able to function without it.
It was at least 2 years before I felt I was doing more than functioning, getting through the days and nights.
In some ways, I am still grieving. I've learned to let those waves of grief wash over me, and to just wait until they recede, because they do.
I don't think every person grieving needs to be medicated for depression. I don't think there's anything wrong with recognizing the depression that a grieving person might be going through, either.
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)and I've never taken antidepressants, but I certainly wouldn't deny them to anyone who feels like he or she needs it. I just don't think antidepressants should be pushed on people simply because they feel sad. Sometimes it's better to feel the pain and work your way through it. It worked for me and made me stronger, I think.
Taverner
(55,476 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)
MADem
(135,425 posts)Why do I think Big Pharma doesn't have the best interests of the bereaved at heart?
Why don't they recommend passionflower and weed? Hell, they grow from the ground--all natural!
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Well, that's baloney, because grief isn't wrong. There's such a thing as good grief. Just ask Charlie Brown."
Michael Scott.
easttexaslefty
(1,554 posts)But have you ever heard of complected grief or unresolved or prolonged grief?
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)The previous standard of care already allowed medication treatment in those cases.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)Stress tends to zap your body of nutrients especially b vitamins so I would encourage anyone whether suffering from grief or just daily stress to make sure they are eating nutritious foods. Especially foods that have vitamins in them that are more in demand when you are stressed, like b vitamins. I don't know if vitamin supplements work or not some studies say they do others say they are useless. I think they might work if you are nutrient deficient and probably not so much if you aren't.
I am not sure what to think of this though. How much grief is normal and where do you start drawing the line. When I was taking psych the standard was two weeks of grieving after that the consensus was the grief should start tapering off. But, in our culture for a long time a year was considered a normal grieving period at least for widows and widowers. I haven't ever seen anyone grieve that long, nor have I ever seen anyone be alright after two weeks. Most people I have seen grieve for a couple of months up to six or so.
I would say if grief interferes with normal functions for more than a couple of weeks maybe it isn't horrible to get help. By interfere I mean the person seems to have major depression, not eating, bathing, can't work at all, won't get out of bed etc...
mother earth
(6,002 posts)Corruption, now rampant, on all fronts...money is the great persuader.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)What other diseases, specifically, do you support withholding medication from treating?
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)I think very little.
But I am willing to hear your expert knowledge.
Also, perhaps you could enlighten me on clinical depression
and the medical reasons behind it.
In advance, THANKS!
BHN
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)What in the hell do you think causes 30% of those diagnosed
with BP to commit suicide by the age of thirty?
The grief experienced in bipolar depression.
You do far more harm than good HiPointDem, and for that
you should be ashamed of yourself.
BHN
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)the neuroscience behind the condition or the
most recent brain imaging results and resulting
BENEFICIAL medical healing available to those who suffer.
BHN
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)weighting of the evidence.
You are no mindreader, that's for sure.
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Last edited Sun Dec 30, 2012, 06:40 PM - Edit history (1)
I am asking again, are you a qualified professional? Even if you are, why are you offering, or more like trying to force medical advice on others?
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)idwiyo
(5,113 posts)You are very hard trying to force your opinion about the topic you are not even remotely qualified to talk about on every single person who tried to tell you that you are wrong. Including those who have relevant personal experiences (me excluded because I was one of the wilfully ignorant who believed that drugs are no better than placebo).
tama
(9,137 posts)a wave pattern of mood swings a "disorder".
And lithium has very undesirable side effects.
What else to you want to know about bipolarity?
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)As the person I love the most is BP-
I'll take the side effects of lithium over an episode any day.
The ignorance on this thread is sickening to me.
Yours included.
BHN
tama
(9,137 posts)And I hope that you also respect and appreciate the sacrifice of the positive side of BP that I presume the person you love the most is willing to do for you.
Others make different choices of how they relate with their wave patterns, and I hope you can respect also that. For example, a wave pattern can be transformed e.g. to spiral towards increasing levels of joy and peace. And there is no end in the world of forms.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)You have no idea what you are talking about when you attempt
to discuss the illness, and YES, it IS an illness.
Please educate yourself before commenting further.
At this point, you appear completely clueless as to the damage
BP causes in the lives of those who are affected and those who love them.
I am going to write to the admins about the damage people like you
and HPD do to the mental health community- it should be a TOS violation IMO.
BHN
tama
(9,137 posts)and it's not my place to question your narrative and how you choose to live your life. But when you try to generalize your narrative and belief system into absolute unquestionable truth and even a TOS violation(sic), there is also lot else to see and hear:
http://www.news-medical.net/news/2005/11/14/14470.aspx
http://www.livescience.com/20185-bipolar-disorder-positive-effects.html
http://www.bphope.com/Item.aspx/915/accentuate-the-positive
etc. etc.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)I sincerely doubt it.
BHN
tama
(9,137 posts)It's obvious that you are in lot of pain, my best wishes and hoping things take a turn to better direction. If you want to share your story, I'm happy to listen.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)We have a group on DU for people who are affected by
mental illness, both personally and by family members.
Perhaps you should visit sometime.
Sorry, but sharing the details of my personal life on this
particular thread would be foolish.
The ignorance far outweighs the insight.
BHN
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)mother earth
(6,002 posts)
CraftyGal
(695 posts)You see we had just celebrated our birthdays the month before his death. I was dealing with guilt as he had asked me out to dinner the night he died and I was unable to go due to previous plans. I had been invited to a birthday party to celebrate a close friends sobriety. It was later in the evening, so I could've gone but I didn't. Michael had left a message on our answering machine for my daughter and I to meet him on Sunday for church.
I called the YWCA, where he was living at the time, got disconnected, so I tried again. This time I got through and it was his dad, Christopher, that answered. Took me a second and then, apparently, I let out a blood curdling scream. My roommate came running, grabbed the phone from me and talked to Christopher to find out what happened.
While on the phone, my foster brother had called. He wanted to get together with my daughter and I later that day. My daughter was 3 at that time. Lisa (roomie) handed the phone over to me and I basically said can't talk, Michael is dead. All he said was on my way. I was devastated! He was my soul mate and so young! You see had turned 35 on the same day I turned 25. We also were sober the same length of time (6 months). We were waiting to get married until we both celebrated 1 yr of sobriety.
Not sure how I got through that first night. I hung out at a 24 hr sober space...attended meetings and spoke with friends. My foster brother took my daughter overnight. I just couldn't get things together. Michaels family was amazing. They included me in the funeral planning as if I was his wife already. After the funeral, I didn't have the will to live, even for my daughter. My doctor put me on a mild antidepressant and that me got me through. I was on it only for a short time...3 months if I remember correctly.
I am doing much better now, although I still miss him. I am currently married and laugh at the parallels between Michael and TrogL...lol. Life is good even though we have been struggling with my health issues.
CraftyGal
babydollhead
(2,231 posts)TexasBushwhacker
(20,167 posts)We don't always have the luxury of taking weeks or months off after the death of a loved one. Depression has effects on the body and shouldn't be taken lightly. If medication helps a person during the grieving process, why shouldn't they take it. They used to talk about someone dying of a broken heart. Since depression can increase your risk for heart disease, maybe they did in a way.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)The cardiovascular toxicity of older generation of tricyclic antidepressants (e.g. imipramine, desipramine, amitriptyline, clomipramine) and neuroleptics (e.g. haloperidol, droperidol, thioridazine, pimozide) is well established.
To overcome the toxicity of old generation of antidepressants and antipsychotics, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants (SSRIs: fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, sertraline, citalopram, venlafaxin) and several new antipsychotics (e.g. clozapine, olanzapine, risperidone, sertindole, aripiprazole, ziprasidone, quetiapine) were introduced during the past decade....they have been reported to have fewer and more benign side effect profile (including cardiovascular) than predecessors.
Surprisingly, an increasing number of case reports have demonstrated that the use of SSRIs and new antipsychotics (e.g. clozapine, olanzapine, risperidone, sertindole, aripiprazole, ziprasidone, quetiapine) is associated with cases of arrhythmias, prolonged QTc interval on electrocardiogram (ECG) and orthostatic hypotension in patients lacking cardiovascular disorders, raising new concerns about the putative cardiovascular safety of these compounds.
In agreement with these clinical reports these new compounds indeed show marked cardiovascular depressant effects in different mammalian and human cardiovascular preparations by inhibiting cardiac and vascular Na+, Ca2+ and K+ channels.
Taken together, these results suggest that the new generation of antidepressants and antipsychotics also have clinically important cardiac as well as vascular effects. Clinicians should be more vigilant about these potential adverse reactions and ECG control may be suggested during therapy, especially in patients with cardiovascular disorders. The primary goal of this review is to shed light on the recently observed clinically important cardiovascular effects of new antidepressants and antipsychotics and discuss the mechanism beyond this phenomenon.
http://www.eurekaselect.com/62141/article
spanone
(135,816 posts)with 'legal' drugs...i.e. drugs they manufacture
green for victory
(591 posts)(the use of cannabinoids) while they were busting dispensaries and confiscating dollars
#6630507 Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants
apparently they plan to slice the patent and award it to exclusive use
that way they can bilk potentially hundreds of "clients" instead of only 1
These blokes are brilliant!
"...The exclusive rights to apply the cannabinoids found in marijuana as therapeutic agents awarded by the U.S. federal government to the firm KannaLife only apply to one specific medical condition, KannaLife's CEO told Toke of the Town Monday night.
Dean Petkanas, chief executive officer at KannaLife Sciences, told us that the exclusivity applies only for the development and sale of cannabinoid based therapeutics as antioxidants and neuroprotectants for use in the treatment of hepatic encephalopathy...
http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/12/cannabinoid_patent_exclusivity_only_applies_to_one.php
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)Fucking embarrassing, like Alex Jones and Tom Cruise hijacked people's accounts to spew a bunch of anti-medical science woo.
Care Acutely
(1,370 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)'science' my ass. the fraud of the so-called 'science' behind these drugs is increasingly being publicized and it's deep as shit.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)I am hopeful that the admins will intervene on your
hurtful and uninformed opinions that I REPEAT-
may prevent people who NEED help from seeking it.
Your comments are NOT appreciated by those who ARE informed
and LIVE with medical mental health issues.
Again, I say shame on you HiPointDem.
BHN
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)'depression,' not about 'bipolar,' but about prescribing drugs for NORMAL BEREAVEMENT.
In violation of long-standing practice.
Please read the OP and quit throwing out your silly red herrings.
Grief is not a disease. Grief is not a 'chemical imbalance'.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)Death is not the only context for the "death of a loved one."
One of the most severe, with out a doubt, but again I challenge
you to look up the neuroscience behind grief.
Not that I expect you to.
BHN
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)dying.
the ruling, and the OP, is not about 'the neuroscience beyond grief'. it's about normal bereavement, so why don't you stop with red herrings and irrelevant bullshit.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)Loss can and often does change neurotransmitter
chemistry in the brain.
End of discussion.
And WHO are you to judge loss?
Have you lost a loved one to the extremely destructive
condition of BP? Until you do, I have no more to say
because you are willfully ignorant and insensitive to so many
in our community.
So be it- Carry on with your destructive diatribe.
You are unreachable, and unteachable.
BHN
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)chemistry.
You don't know anything about me or my experiences, & I won't offer them up to you as tokens in a pissing match. If you wish to address the scientific literature, I will match you cite for cite.
Your community is not the only community that exists with reference to depression or mental illness.
Furthermore, the OP is not about mental illness, though you insist on making it so. It's about NORMAL BEREAVEMENT.
Confusious
(8,317 posts)nice to know you've never been there.
Good for you.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)no less.
amazing.
Confusious
(8,317 posts)Usually they start out with "I've been sad, but..." or "why do they need the drugs" or "maybe a natural cure" or "these things should be banned" or "these things are dangerous" or "grief is not a disease"
Just a few words are all that's needed for someone that's been there.
Ps. There's normal grief, but when you have grief for no reason, that's a problem.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)no mindreader.
and that's all there is to say about that.
Confusious
(8,317 posts)There's a severe lack of understanding that comes through.
It's like a person using racial epitaphs. That person is understood to automatically be a racist.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)mindreader at all.
but you are apparently a person who thinks s/he can make global judgements about others on the basis of a single word.
at any rate, this has become boring.
Confusious
(8,317 posts)Words speak volumes about a person.
And you've show a lack of understanding.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Everyone gets sad from time to time, Get a hobby, There are other fish in the ocean, It's not really the end of the world, etc, etc.
My personal favourite one is " there are MILLIONS of people who feel exactly like you!"
What pisses me off the most is these inhumane arseholes will do their best trying to make depressed person feel even more depressed, weak and unworthy. Just look at some of the posts on the bottom of this page.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)That's what I'm talking about. Reading that, I'm embarrassed for you, and for this site. Would you like to posit some anti-vaccine rhetoric while you're at it?
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)both diagnosed and undiagnosed disorders also lose people they love? And that not everyone has the ability to process emotional trauma in a healthy way?
You act like you're going to be forcibly dosed or something. Why so scared of doctors having this as an option? Shouldn't it be between them and their patients?
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)functioning within a given time period, if they became suicidal, etc.
No prescribing is *ever* just between the doctor & his/her patient. Prevailing standards of care limit what the doctor can do because if anything goes wrong and the doc has gone outside standards of care, his/her license may be pulled, etc.
This new ruling is about loosening standards of care to allow *more* prescribing, without any distinction between 'bereavement' and 'depression' -- to in effect pathologize bereavement.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)First you say "Doctors have always had it as an option," then you say the new ruling expands their options with patients.
If they always had the option, this doesn't matter. And if they didn't, why again are you so freaked out by a person's doctor being able to prescribe them something to help them?
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)defined by suicidal impulses, inability to function for extended periods of time, etc.
there's no contradiction.
i am not 'freaked out'. i am apalled & disgusted at the absence of scientific or clinical standards this new ruling exemplifies.
green for victory
(591 posts)unless you're calling the US Government National Institutes of Health woo
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1564177/
US National Institutes of Health: Antidepressants and Violence-problems at the Interface of Medicine & Law
why not click here and see what real life users say:
http://www.paxilprogress.org/forums/
there's this:Let Them Eat Prozac: The Unhealthy Relationship Between the Pharmaceutical Industry and Depression (Medicine, Culture, and History) by MRC Psych. David Healy
a highly regarded book -David Healy is no scientologist. In fact, he is one of the leading experts in the world on SSRI drugs. He's in the video you obviously ignored upthread. He's the one that exposed the "scientologist" smear.
Here's a free podcast with Dr. David Healy as a guest discussing his new book Pharmageddon
David Healy's most comprehensive and forceful argument against the pharmaceuticalization of medicine, tackles problems in health care that are leading to a growing number of deaths and disabilities. Healy, who was the first to draw attention to the now well-publicized suicide-inducing side effects of many anti-depressants, attributes our current state of affairs to three key factors: product rather than process patents on drugs, the classification of certain drugs as prescription-only, and industry-controlled drug trials.
Jefferson Exchange -- October 2, 2012, HOUR 2 Phamargeddon Redux
http://directory.libsyn.com/episode/index/show/jpr/id/2084251
Here's what people that don't want this discussed should really worry about- the fact that once one starts looking into this, it's almost instantly obvious to almost everyone that there is a problem. Tick tock.
Care Acutely
(1,370 posts)as all medications in all situations should be.
It has been very helpful for many. Bereavement can be a crushing, even debilitating/deadly experience for some and if they may have their agony mitigated even a bit, then it is to me the height of assholery to demand that they be denied that help.
Ilsa
(61,692 posts)The drug, I doubt the patient is ever weaned off it. I think that sometimes these medications can be helpful to "jumpstart" feeling better, but long term, it's better to get off them.
Sometimes lousy feelings, like mild anxiety, can help motivate a person to tackle a lomg term problem.
TexasBushwhacker
(20,167 posts)for 6 months to a year. Sometimes that means prescribing progressively smaller doses. Some though, like Prozac, have a really long half life (2 to 3 days) so weaning is just a matter of skipping a dose, then 2 doses, etc.
CountAllVotes
(20,868 posts)After my father died she was at a loss as to what to do with her life. She was so very sad sad sad.
Then they gave her Wellbutrin. With the Wellbutrin went MY MOTHER. What happened to her? She was NOT the same person any more. 
Grief never goes away -- it just gets a little bit less with time hopefully.
Maybe a little bit of love and and little bit of help and a whole lot of understanding would do a whole lot more than another pill dare I suggest?
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)amphetamine family.
So apparently smokers also have a 'chemical imbalance'.
I hope your mother is doing better.
CountAllVotes
(20,868 posts)Gone thanks to lung cancer in 2002. It was very fast and very furious. She was a former smoker but the lung cancer was not from smoking I was told.
I knew about the smoking thing but never realized it was from a class of drugs like amphetamines! Woah ...
Thanks for your condolences. I sure miss both of them a lot.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)Many of them have severe, long-lasting withdrawal effects.
Confusious
(8,317 posts)If you say no it isn't, then you really have no idea how bad it can be.
You can also stop taking them, they aren't like heroin. I could decide tomorrow to stop taking mine, and as long as I wean myself off, I'll be fine. ( well, until the depression and OCD start up again)
("oh, I've been sad" I'm not Fing sad, I'm depressed, which means I feel like shit all time, or don't feel anything at all. They aren't Fing happy pills, they get me to the point I can be happy.)
AndSheGoesDown
(5 posts)I had panic attacks and have suffered from depression to different degrees for quite a while (now it's mild, thankfully.). I'm young and was perfectly healthy and I had so many dangerous side effects to so many psychiatric pills I was forced to stop taking them for my health. The last one was a pill they gave me for hypomania (short and technical for "i'm crazy as fuck and cannot stop moving" ... No, I'm not bipolar. It was a side effect from an antidepressant (others gave me tachichardia and high blood pressure immediately), and after a year of taking it I was a serious danger to myself and maybe others. So they gave me this pill.. 3 days later I was in hospital from severe allergy (erythema multiforme), covered in a brownish purple rash. It's been 2.5 years and I still have allergies I didn't have before. I was allergic to the sun for one year. I gained 20kg from the allergy meds. I'm allergic to grass and a bunch of other things I was never allergic to before... Last spring it was so bad I had to quit University for a semester, because it gave me unbearable stomach problems on top of breathing issues and a rash and I couldn't concentrate at all and felt sick and weak. On top of that, all of this incident is on my medical record, and when they see this pill on it they assume I'm bipolar; most doctors don't take me seriously whenever I have a health issue. I haven't taken psychiatric meds in over 2 years now and I've been way better without them, went back to Uni, moved by myself, got a boyfriend and a dog. All things I couldn't have done on antidepressants.
All of this unfortunately true and ongoing story is just to illustrate the issue: People with mental illness can be better with pills, yes. They might make you happier, yes. But they have so many side effects (that are a lot more common than they admit, since psychiatrists sometimes blame the fact you were ill to start with for your new symptoms) that they should be limited to people who really need them. And there's also the fact they don't know how most of these pills work on a chemical level (yes, serotonin inhibitors, what does serotonin do? how do you prove someone has a serotonin deficiency? "oh we think that..." or what kind of issues they might bring until after they're out in the market for a while and they're forced to putting a black label. The amount of people who get hypomania, kill themselves and even commit crimes because of SSRIs is insane. Not everyone does, of course, and a select few actually get better from these meds but is it worth it? There should either be lots of information readily available for patients (which there isn't), or strong regulations on who can take them. It's like giving chemo to cancer patients without warning them of the weakness it causes or the loss of hair... Except chemo actually works a lot more than psychiatric meds in the case of depression (some work just as much as placebo does), and we know its mechanism.
dkf
(37,305 posts)no_hypocrisy
(46,076 posts)Until now, I've been familiar with primary care/family M.D.s who prescribe a temporary sleeping aid like Ambien as a lot of people can't fall asleep due to the grief, stress, the responsibilities thrust upon them due to the death of someone they were close to. If there were grief issues, the patient would be referred to their clergy, mental health therapist, or even a psychiatrist with an emphasis of talking about unresolved issues, not a way to get more pharmaceuticals.
This article makes grief a physiological/neurological disorder instead of an expected byproduct of living. I know there are extreme manifestations where grief can be so extreme that one's sanity or safety (e.g., suicide) is endangered. That's different from the premise of medicating grief in general.
Freakin' Brave New World . . . . where you're not allowed to cry and grieve.
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)It was rough but I saw no need for any medication.
Speck Tater
(10,618 posts)BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)Clearly your life has never been touched by severe pain or loss
to death or mental illness in a loved one.
I am sincerely disappointed in your lack of sensitivity
to the percentage of your fellow DU members who know
all too well how medication has SAVED lives.
BHN 
Speck Tater
(10,618 posts)I've lost many friends and family members over the years.
My grief over my father's death changed my life forever.
My best friend suddenly dropped dead at Thirty.
A close nephew had a stroke at age four.
Grief is a very important part of being human. There's no way in hell I want to medicate away that experience. We need to come to understand how grief is an important part of the human experience, not run away from it.
Sensitivity means being there to hold someone's hand and help them through a painful experience. It does NOT mean giving them a pill so you can turn your back on their inconvenient grief and pretend it doesn't exist.
Medicating grief cheapens it, and to my way of thinking, is very wrong. I earned my grief with a lifetime of loving and caring. I'm damn well going to make that grief a part of my development as a human being. God knows I paid a high enough price for it that I won't throw it away or let it go to waste.
My grief made me a better person by making me more able to understand other people's grief. If I had skipped over that inconvenience by medicating it away I would have lost out on that and I would not be as compassionate a person as I am today. (Even though you, who don't even know me, seem confident in declaring that I am uncaring.)
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)Loss and grief are like snowflakes- no two are the same
in the human system.
I too, am more sensitive and compassionate at this point in my life,
due to loss and grief.
However, my point on this thread continues to be this:
NO two people experience the same results, and medication has allowed
many of us to carry on with normal lives and I resent the constant
stigmatization of medication/mental health issues on
DU.
Love to you-
BHN
Speck Tater
(10,618 posts)Medication has its place, for sure. I just hate to see it so over-used for the slightest little thing. Young Johnny fidgets in school; put him on ADHD meds. Peter Pumpkin eater eats way too much and doesn't exorcise at all; give him a diet pill. Mary can't keep her eyes open because she stays out all night partying; give her an upper pill instead of a good nights sleep.
These medications can be life-saving miracles. Or they can be crutches for those anxious to take the easy way out. It's all in the details of the individual case, so I agree with you that blanket judgements really don't apply.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)government to help them do so.
prophylactic use of antidepressants on all stroke patients? antidepressants marketed as stop-smoking aids? antidepressants as anti-diabetic drugs?
yes, they are trying to do that, and more, etc etc etc.
Speck Tater
(10,618 posts)Catherina
(35,568 posts)Go ahead. I'm a retired Pharma worker. The hundreds of thousands they gave me in stock as an Exec Assistant guaranteed a huge step to my retirement. What I know is that the MILLIONS the executives I worked for made EVERY single year in bonuses for effective marketing came from convincing people that their placebo pills with 1-2 added ingredients are more effective than sugar pills if they can prove that in 2 tests they ran, their pills performed better. It doesn't even matter if they ran 10,000 tests where those pills failed but as long as they can give the FDA two test results where their pill did better than sugar pills, here comes the approval!
America you are SO being screwed. Wake the fuck up please.
the value of a friend who can listen your sorrow and loss with empathy and experience having gone through something similar is priceless. And then on your turn, you can be such a friend to someone else in need.
Avalux
(35,015 posts)When my long term relationship ended a few years ago, I had a very difficult time coping and sought help. My doc prescribed an antidepressant, saying if I took it for a short period of time, it would do the trick. Boy was he wrong. I took Celexa, which made my thinking very cloudy and my 'situational depression' got worse, not better. I felt as if my life was completely out of control, I felt as if I had lost touch with who I was while taking it.
Antidepressants may work for people with chronic depression, but I am not sure giving them to people as a quick fix for grief due to life circumstances is a good idea. It was a terrible idea for me.
AnnieBW
(10,422 posts)If the person's grief is so severe as to make them non-functional, then it's between them and their doctors. But I think that it should not be viewed as a panacea. I'm on anti-depressants, and have been for several years. It didn't lessen my grief about my father's passing one little bit. The Cymbalta made it easier to function during that time, but it doesn't do squat for grief itself.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)There are 56 attached articles to this on the subject
of neurotransmitter changes related to loss/grief.
Until you understand the research, you might want to rethink your
position on this topic. Or better yet- shut up.
BHN
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)No, it's not. There are 'neurotransmitter changes' when you blink your fucking eye.
I am way more educated on this topic than anyone i've seen posting here.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)But please do carry on, as your ranting is amusing to many of us at this point.
BHN
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)what they do, and how they work.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)I expect nothing of substance from you on the matter BTW.
BHN
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)Got it.
BHN
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)You have offered up NOTHING of substantial "input."
However I want to thank you for starting the DU movement
to shut down idiot voices on DU where mental health issues are concerned.
YOU are not a doctor, and by your postings, you have made it clear
that you know NOTHING about MH conditions and the biological
and medical factors that are related- so go ahead, make a fool of yourself.
WE, in the MHSG have noted you and your ignorance and destructive
postings clearly.
You are a FOOL HPD, and a dangerous one on this topic.
I will do what ever is required to shut your voice up on these issues,
for the sake of all that suffer-
Again- SHAME ON YOU.
BHN
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)name-calling & mind-reading mostly.
not only that, you pretend to represent all people with mental problems (you don't, & your stance doesn't) and you have set yourself up as a witch-hunter & censor.
i have called you no names. nor have i made any remarks about your personal experiences except to say they're not universal.
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)You have never responded to ANY of my links to
the neurotransmitter connections.
You are blowing smoke at this point, and I am not
the only one who thinks so.
Please, give us some examples of your "knowledgeable" input
on MH issues....
PLEASE?
I can't wait to laugh some more at your idiocy.
BHN
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)green for victory
(591 posts)He co wrote this paper:
US National Institutes of Health: Antidepressants and Violence-problems at the Interface of Medicine & Law http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1564177/
Have you had a chance to read it? Might want to...Because this paper is a devastating account of the dangers people that take SSRI drugs face, as well as those around them, if they are not subject to sufficient care and follow up.
from the paper:"Both clinical trial and pharmacovigilance data point to possible links between these drugs and violent behaviours... Many jurisdictions appear not to have considered the possibility that a prescription drug may induce violence...The new issues highlighted by these cases need urgent examination jointly by jurists and psychiatrists in all countries where antidepressants are widely used..."
Ignoring these warnings by health professionals (Healy is not the only qualified doctor to issue such warnings) puts the patient and society at risk.
If you attempt to shut up posters like the OP you are deliberately stifling attempts to find facts and information that could lead to fewer of these horrible incidents.
This is a discussion board. If you do not want discussion why are you here?
BeHereNow--"I will do what ever is required to shut your voice up on these issues,for the sake of all that suffer-"
Shame on you. You probably won't read that paper, won't attempt to seek out any opinions that challenge your already made up mind, and will continue on seeking to stifle debate wherever you can. And some people will work doubly and triply hard to make up for your desire to shovel facts under rugs. Mark my words.
Again- Shame on You
EDIT: add- There's one thing you should consider, if nothing else. That is the fact that many people once exposed to the above can see immediately that there is enough of a problem to call for an immediate investigation. In the last 9 days or so, I have personally helped to expose at least a few thousand people to this link b/w SSRI's and violence that had never even considered it. If only 2 or 3 percent of these people do what I have already done, an investigation is imminent. Tick Tock.
**************
links:
4800 SSRI incidents in a sortable sourced database:
http://ssristories.com/index.php
Free podcast-David Healy Jefferson Exchange-October 2, 2012 Phamargeddon
http://directory.libsyn.com/episode/index/show/jpr/id/2084251
US Media coverage of the link b/w SSRI's and violence-
Henry Waxman @3:04 says pharma has misled patients and physicians
Michael Moore calls for an investigation into the link b/w SSRIs and violence:
WilmywoodNCparalegal
(2,654 posts)After the hysterectomy, I had to deal with a side effect that is well known to other women of childbearing age who have hysterectomies, but not well publicized by ob/gyns: depression.
It hit me severely. Among the many manifestations, I'd cry for days about losing my childbearing abilities and I'd have some suicidal ideations at times (which never came to fruition). I'd avoid colleagues for fear talk would be about babies and children. I asked the ob/gyn for help and she prescribed Paxil. I am not a pill popper by any means. But Paxil did save me. After a few weeks (the time it takes for the medication to have an effect), I began crying a lot less and thinking about 'babies' a lot less as well.
I discontinued the medication after a year and a half on it, because I felt like I didn't need it any longer. This was in 2010. Then, a bout of the baby blues came back a few months ago. This time, I went to a psychiatrist. After some questions, he ordered a battery of tests.
I was then diagnosed as ADHD. Sometimes, depression is a co-morbid condition of ADHD, especially untreated adult ADHD. He prescribed Ritalin, which is basically speed.
I am now a new person on many different levels. I am learning to cope with the baby blues - which may not ever go away. I don't shun my coworkers and even my upbeat nature and caustic sense of humor have returned.
Antidepressants may or may not be for everyone - I'm not a psychiatrist. But they did help me. Medications like Ritalin are certainly not for everyone, but they have surely made a difference in my life
If it were not for medications like Paxil or Ritalin, I'm not so sure I could have handled these past couple of years. I'm sure there are plenty of irresponsible doctors out there who prescribe antidepressants or stimulants like candy, but for those who actually need some help, they are invaluable.
gulliver
(13,180 posts)It is by Washington University Psychiatrists Dr. Charles F. Zorumski and Dr. Eugene H. Rubin. That book explains the field of Psychiatry and the various mental health trends in an extremely easy-to-understand, balanced way.
I also recommend Unhinged by Dr. Daniel J. Carlat. Tom Cruise and Scientology do a disservice to the criticism of Psychiatry, but people who think Tom Cruise and Scientology are the only ones leveling criticism have another think coming.
From my family's experiences with the mental health system, I think psycho-pharmaceuticals can be very good things, even lifesavers. I also think they can be extremely bad things, not just because of short- and long-term side effects, but because they may delay and distract from other treatments and efforts on the part of patients and their families. Therapy and lifestyle change are also very good things and should not be shortchanged. Getting the balance right is critical in my opinion.
That is why I think the profit motive should be completely erased from the equation through single payer insurance and even nationalization. Big Pharma and Big Healthcare are broken dinosaurs that contribute less and less to the benefit of patients and more and more to healthcare system failure. They advertise, they lobby, and they dictate the evolution of medicine with an eye to expediency and profit. If they can't somehow reform themselves and find some way to stay in business that is not in conflict with the well being of patients, they need to go.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)as a whole -- & mostly not in good directions.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)who tells me that when a close relative or spouse dies, the period of mourning is MONTHS not days. Friends and family help the person/people through that time. It seems so much more psychologically healthy to me than what we do in our culture.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)of wearing mourning black for a socially prescribed period. The clothing was first a symbol of mourning (honoring the dead) & also a signal that one should treat the person in mourning more gently than usual, should not make demands on the person, etc.
Modern capitalist culture doesn't allow such niceties. I remember a long time ago when my stepfather (I was very close to him) died, I went back to work a couple of days after the funeral. I had expected a card from my office, but there was nothing -- only a couple of the coworkers I knew best offered condolences. The office had a rule that no such cards, gifts, etc. would be given for workers' personal landmarks.
It felt like shit. It was, in fact, crazy-making.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)Couldn't afford time off really and processing my grief was a long difficult process.
I agree, modern capitalist culture is a big culprit in this. We're supposed to be working machine parts and strong emotions need to be supressed as they get in the way of production.