Posted by SLS on July 21, 2005, at 20:20:46
In reply to Re: About my post..and Suicide..., posted by linkadge on July 20, 2005, at 20:25:39
> That is correct. These drugs have not been tested nearly as long as we take them for.
Nor have most other drugs once they are approved. Am I missing your point? No guarantees. There is always some degree of uncertainty as to the long-term effects of a drug once it is approved. That's why there are COSTART reporting and Phase IV investigations.
> We have a panic attack at the notion that our drugs might stop working one day, and that we might not be able to take them indefinately, and yeild the same results.
The same with drugs for AIDS, cancer, diabetes, hypertension, heart-failure, Parkinsons...
> As a result we cling to the notion that these drugs are fixing some deficiancy,
How do we know that they are not?
> because that notion leads us to believe that their workings are more natural. Why do we buy into the chemical imballence theory?
Because it reflects what we have observed clinically and investigationally.
> Mainly because it comforts us.
It never comforted me. I *wanted* my suffering to be 100% psychological because it meant that *I* was in control of my destiny. It was within my power to get well using psychotherapy and hard work. I was *extremely* pissed off when I discovered it was biological.
> Comfort us it may, but save us it will not. As if, knowing how the drug works will keep it working.
Exactly. Empirical. Things work or they don't. Antidepressants work.