![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 13 of 13. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by linkadge on October 23, 2005, at 13:15:58
http://mentalhealth.about.com/b/a/121991.htm
Linkadge
Posted by rjlockhart98 on October 23, 2005, at 13:19:13
In reply to mice raised on prozac grow up depressed, posted by linkadge on October 23, 2005, at 13:15:58
please dont tell me that. Im 18 and take prozac.
EEEK.
Posted by Phillipa on October 23, 2005, at 18:36:24
In reply to Re: mice raised on prozac grow up depressed, posted by rjlockhart98 on October 23, 2005, at 13:19:13
Link's into mice today! Fondly, Phillipa
Posted by linkadge on October 23, 2005, at 20:33:45
In reply to Re: mice raised on prozac grow up depressed, posted by Phillipa on October 23, 2005, at 18:36:24
I actually thought about buying a mouse, you know something to keep me company. I am lonely here, but I don't think they allow pets where I am staying.
Linkadge
Posted by SLS on October 24, 2005, at 5:55:18
In reply to mice raised on prozac grow up depressed, posted by linkadge on October 23, 2005, at 13:15:58
> http://mentalhealth.about.com/b/a/121991.htm
I haven't tried to find the actual publication or abstract, but there is too little described in this review to evaluate what's going on with these mice. Were there sham treatments given as a control? Hopefully. What was the dosage of fluoxetine given to these mice? Unknown.
It sounds sort of like PTSD to me. I think these mice might have been traumatized and behaviorally altered by regular injections of supratherapeutic dosages of an anxiogenic drug. This would not be extrapolatable to how people are exposed to this drug. That said, it is difficult to believe that any psychoactive drug will not produce some significant changes in a rapidly developing brain.
- Scott
Posted by med_empowered on October 24, 2005, at 9:42:07
In reply to Re: mice raised on prozac grow up depressed » linkadge, posted by SLS on October 24, 2005, at 5:55:18
I cant offer up any links, but I've read some stuff that would seem to indicate we may have a problem here. Apparently, the kinds of brain changes seen in short-term, high-dose SSRI treatment of lab animals is pretty comparable to what you see with similar treatment with high-dose serotonin releasing agents such as Ecstasy (these are the studies that are part of the basis for the "Ecstasy causes brain damage" claim). Anyway, there's apparently some corkscrewing and other stuff that would indicate a chemically-induced pathology that could lead to long-term depression. Its kind of like what you see with the old-school neuroleptics; permanent brain changes caused by the high-level D2 blockade lead to "supersensitivity" and a sort of "kindling" that in turn creates a brain abnormality in which the brain is suddenly super-sensitive to its own dopamine inducing (sometimes) a "toxic psychosis". In those cases, some patients who had previously never been psychotic (say, they were given Triavil for depression or something) become psychotic...it explains the constant dosage increases required in some schizophrenic patients (comparable to what you see with "Prozac poop-out"). I think that, if this proves to describe some human situations, we'll probably see the biggest problems in drugs used in kids--particularly in kids given medication combos (the number of kids on such combos has exploded; childhood bipolar is a hot new diagnosis, and ADHD kids are often treated with a number of medications).
Posted by linkadge on October 24, 2005, at 15:19:44
In reply to Re: mice raised on prozac grow up depressed » linkadge, posted by SLS on October 24, 2005, at 5:55:18
I do not doubt that these findings, (although preliminary), do not fully extend to the treatment of humans.
Ed published a similar study a while ago that showed that treatement of mice during adolecence resulted in long term alterations serotonergic autoreceptor function.
Linkadge
Posted by linkadge on October 24, 2005, at 15:33:05
In reply to makes sense, posted by med_empowered on October 24, 2005, at 9:42:07
Thats exactly it. Its all fine and dandy to say that the drugs are safe, but a drug company doesn't need to check to see that it's drug is not corkscrewing people's receptors after 10 years of use.
Serotonin abnormalities have not been conclisively shown in the depressed population, and clinically effective antidepressants like Tianeptine only serve to complicate the debate.So, we tweek a chemical higher that it was ever meant to be, and you end up with people like me,
who are basically perma-depressed, and will probably stay that way for a long time.
We ignore this information because it is depressing, but what is more depressing is the prospect that we ignore this information and get worse.
Linkadge
Posted by linkadge on October 24, 2005, at 15:40:17
In reply to Re: makes sense, posted by linkadge on October 24, 2005, at 15:33:05
What I find most disturbing is how I constantly hear about people who were depressed, (but not suicidal) before taking SSRI's and became suicidal after withdrawl.
My neighbour took zoloft and paxil respectively. Initially treated for moderate depression and anxiety with no suicidiality.
Later, told me the account of their withdrawl which included profound depression and suicidiality.
I said to myself, that sounds familliar!
Linkadge
Posted by SLS on October 24, 2005, at 17:50:03
In reply to Re: makes sense, posted by linkadge on October 24, 2005, at 15:33:05
Hi Linkadge.
What does "corkscrewing" mean. I know I've seen the term before, but I don't remembeer anything about it. (So what else is new)?
- Scott
Posted by linkadge on October 25, 2005, at 10:49:23
In reply to Re: makes sense » linkadge, posted by SLS on October 24, 2005, at 17:50:03
THe normal receptor has a kind of raindrop shape.
One of the studies that Breggin sites showed that under certain conditions, mice exposed to SSRI's had serotonin receptors that resembled a corkscrew, ie a twisted/deformed nonsymetrical shape.
As med empowered noted, serotonin releasing agents such as ecstacy have been implicated in similar morphological changes.
Althought Lilly tried to discredit the studies, I found their arguments particularly weak.
I'm not really a conspiracy theorist, but there are good reasons that a government might not want people to freak out about their anti-freak out meds.
Linkadge
Posted by med_empowered on October 25, 2005, at 15:48:41
In reply to Re: makes sense, posted by linkadge on October 25, 2005, at 10:49:23
I dont doubt the study's findings--in fact, I think that as the SSRIs fall from favor and companys lose financial incentive to discredit the new data, it will come to be widely accepted. What sucks is the deception. I mean, billions of $$$ spent..patients constantly being told "yes, there is a safe, effective solutions..." and for what? Overpriced, largely ineffective, possibly dangerous "solutions"? It seems like every psychiatric "wonderdrug" turns out to have hidden darksides that were apparent from the beginning, but not reported. Barbiturates, antispcyhotics, benzos, stimulants, now the SSRIs...different time periods, different drugs, same story: patients are lied to and screwed over. Thanks alot.
Posted by linkadge on October 26, 2005, at 18:16:48
In reply to this sucks, posted by med_empowered on October 25, 2005, at 15:48:41
"different time periods, different drugs, same story: patients are lied to and screwed over."
Well said
Linkadge
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.