Posted by David Newhouse on October 26, 2000, at 9:13:56
In reply to Re: SLS...more psychiatry vs jensen, posted by JohnL on October 26, 2000, at 6:20:44
You wrote me about two weeks ago regarding Dr. Jensens book. You said you could help find some pharm. sights that I would be able to order from. Well, I've got the book and I'm ready to roll. Write back if you get a chance.
> Ok, I agree to disagree, since we're both trying to do so in a friendly manner. I like that. Since the jensen method does actually make a lot of sense...to those of us who have read the book...I welcome critique and rebuttals. After all, every critique and rebuttal aimed at me is most likely one I had myself before I read the book! :-)
> One area I disagree with jensen is the 5 day trial thing. I really like 2 weeks better. That's because it meshes with conventional psychiatry. Even conventional psychiatry agrees that IF a medicine is going to work, it should show some sign within two weeks. As I browsed through www.mentalhealth.com studying scientific data, most of the studies say Effexor, and tricyclics, work in as little as 4 days to 2 weeks, but full effects aren't felt until 4 weeks. I think a 2 week trial period is more realistic than 5 days. It also is a closer match to conventional psychiatry.
> Should someone stay on a medicine past 2 weeks if there is zero improvement? Personally I don't think so. I think they should try another one. There is almost always a favorite, but the patient will never discover a favorite without a chance to do comparisons. I think it is extremely important that if it looks like someone might be on medication for a long time, we want to be very sure they are on the best one for them. Comparisons is the only way to do that. Of course, if someone has a real good response to a med within 2 weeks, then the whole search ends right there. Mission accomplished.
> As to the Serzone example, can a medication work if it hasn't worked in 2 weeks? Of course it can. It's up to each individual to decide if they want to stick it out. But if they don't want to, there are so many other fine choices. Our ancestors had no choice. We do. This is important....jensen himself says if his method isn't working, then he reverts to conventional psychiatry....if conventional methods aren't working then he reverts to his method. He uses both interchangeably or mixed. Each patient is different. But that's the whole point of the jensen thing...each patient is different. This is especially evident when we consider that many of his toughest patients were cured with drugs that had no clinical justification.
> When jensen's website is up again, you might email him questions you may have. He's good at answering emails. I would be curious to see what info he provides you too. Not that it would change my opinions or anything, but just curious. He really is...and I can't state this with enough emphasis...a real authentic expert on brain chemistry. This man understands brain chemistry and medicine reactions to an amazing degree. Prozac, Zoloft, and Paxil as just one example. Do you know which is better statistically if suicide has been attempted once? Twice? How does each affect dopamine, if at all? How are Prozac and Celexa actually very similar (besides being SSRIs)? Is Tenuate a substitute for Wellbutrin? If so, why? If not, why not? Ionamine for ADD? Yes? No? Why? Why not? Statistically, which is better across a broad spectrum of illnesses...Lithium? Depakote? Tegretol? Which is 2nd place? Which is least effective? On and on...it's endless! Detailed knowledge like this can make all the difference in the world. Even if Jensen didn't have any particular method, just his grasp of medication and chemistry knowledge is awe inspiring.