Posted by Lou Pilder on August 26, 2012, at 12:23:29
In reply to Lou's reply-tymhzrhn » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on August 26, 2012, at 12:05:24
> > I like this one. Although the article is old, it probably includes more cases than any other study you will find. It was written at a time before SSRIs became available, and MAOIs and tricyclics were about the only antidepressants available. Doctors at the time were much more informed and comfortable with their use than today. Combining MAOIs and tricyclics were not strictly forbidden. My first introduction to this treatment modality occurred in 1983. It was then that my doctors at Columbia treated me with a combination of Nardil and amitriptyline. I have been prescribed tricyclics with MAOIs on and off for the last 30 years without incident. Recommendations for this treatment were made to me by doctors at Columbia, NYU, NIMH, Beth Israel, Harvard, and Princeton.
> >
> >
> > - Scott
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/942286
> >
> >
> > "Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1976 Jul;33(7):828-30.
> > Combining tricyclic and monoamine oxidase inhibitor antidepressants.
> > Spiker DG, Pugh DD.
> > Abstract
> >
> > The charts of 150 inpatients and 51 outpatients treated with a monoamine oxidase inhibitor (MAOI)-tricyclic antidepressant combination were reviewed. The incidence and severity of side effects among the patients on the combined regimen were essentially the same as those seen in the control groups. There were no deaths or strokes resulting from use of this regimen. The most frequent troublesome side effect was orthostatic hypotension. We conclude that the use of a MAOI-tricyclic combination in oral therapeutic doses is safe. However, the efficacy of this combination has not yet been proved, and it may be particularly toxic if taken in an overdose."
>
> Friends,
> There has been an ongoing unfolding of knowlege concerning the interactions of psychotropic drugs that supercede old studies going back 50 years or so ago. Back then, it is been reported that "studies" were submitted to the research periodicals and such by throwing out studies that showed otherwise as to what wanted to be shown, and keeping "studies" that could show what was wanted to be shown. There have been facts arising that refute old studies, just like old studies by tobacco companies that they said showed that tobacco smoking was safe and did not cause cancer. Then as 50 years ran, the facts that people died from lung cancer and other cancers from smoking tobacco emerged.
> I am from a school that rejects "studies" if any of the people involved have ties to the drug companies or are doctors wanting to promote the safety of psychotropic chemicals. And I also reject any "study" that has few participants and we do not know if they have cherry-picked the population for the study. I consider the real-world repoted events to be definitive , for I am in the camp that thinks that thousands and thousands of participants are needed to get clarity as to what is wanted to be known as a result of taking a drug or combination. Would it make any sense if the tobacco companies came out with a study done by people that they paid that said that tobacco is safe to smoke? And how about thalidomide? Do you know about that? If not, you could do a search,[Lou, thalidomide} and see what I posted before Mr. Hsiung made a prohibition to me that prohibited me from getting deeper into the facts concerning psychotropic drugs.
> But be advised that the subject here is not just taking Nardil with the tricyclic, but also the two with a benzodiazepiene and a specific tricyclic, Nortriptyline, which takes the equation into a deeper realm of interactions that could cause addiction, death and life-ruining conditions such as diabetes. There is the potential of death when the two are taken together that could have been unbeknownst to those conducting the study cited here from 50 years or so ago.
> Lou
> http://www.ehealthme.com/nortriptyline-hydrochloride-and-nardil/cardio-respiratory-arrest
>
Friends,
The subject of crdibility in psychiatry and psychotropic drugs is a decision that I would like for you to make by having more information to use to make that decision. You see, death can be a result of taking psychotropic drugs, and I am prohibited here by Mr Hsiung from posting what could show the relationship of psychiatry and (redacted by respondent). But is it not enough that 42,000 people died last year from psychotropic drugs and that maybe 150 died from peanuts? And the people that died from peanuts died because they had an allergic reaction that some people have. There are people that could die from a bee sting or eating shellfish. I do not think that the same thing is comparable to taking psytchotropic drugs because people die from the drug, not an allergy to it. The drugs can cause CNS depression and cariac arrest. Has not time been a judge?
Lou
http://youtube.com/watch?v=cKMn-_aQoPk
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:1024162
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20120818/msgs/1024248.html