Psycho-Babble Medication Thread 13841

Shown: posts 1 to 14 of 14. This is the beginning of the thread.

 

Dr Jensen protocol

Posted by My name isn't missing!!!! on October 25, 1999, at 9:35:08

This is about the 5th time I have tried to post a new thread and it keeps saying I forgot my name. I don't know what the problem is but here goes. I need to get some input on this.

There is a website for this doctor (WWW.drjensen.com) that provides consultations in treating chemical imbalances with drug protocols, including all of the various medications that have been used in most brain chemical imbalances.

I know if it sounds too good to be true you shouldn't believe it but I am desparate to figure out what medication(s) would be the most helpful for me with chronic depression. Like so many of you I have tried most of the typical AD's but haven't tried alot of the other meds so many of you talk about with such familiarity. I am tired of trying and failing meds. I keep losing big chunks of time doing this and need to find the right med before I run out of time. No I'm not suicidal but sick of depression ruling my life.

This doctor talks about trying various classifications of meds for brief period of time until the right med is identified. Oftentimes, I've told my doctor that when the med is right, I will usually know it in a day or two. This is part of the protocol since you only try meds for brief periods of time.

Has anyone read about this protocol or have any insight into it and if I should pursue it???

 

Re: Dr Jensen protocol

Posted by JohnL on October 25, 1999, at 13:18:48

In reply to Dr Jensen protocol, posted by My name isn't missing!!!! on October 25, 1999, at 9:35:08

Personally I would be hesitant. Several reasons. Though we can hypothesize what our individual imbalances are, there are too many mysteries and variables to have any accuracy. If someone could do that, they'ld have already won a Nobel Prize.

We never know what works until there has been a good trial. Doctors in-the-know have discovered through experience that anything short of 3 months is not a good trial. That's 3 months at the high end of the dose range. I agree with you that if there is a good initial response then that should be the right drug. But it doesn't work that way, sadly. Many times that initial response is related to a mild hypomania or some other bodily reaction. These drugs take weeks to work. So anything that works in a few days is suspect. It's wonderful, but suspect.

I've had real good initial reactions to some drugs, only to find the response deteriorated rapidly thereafter regardless of dosage or length of time. And some drugs that seemed horrible at first seemed to get better and better week after week. It was only intolerable sexual side effects that caused me to eventually continue my search.

It's just my opinion based on my own experience and what experienced psychiatrists write about, but I respectfully disagree strongly with dr jenson's protocol. Antidepressants just don't work that way to fit into a neat simple short strategy...sadly. My vote is I don't think you should pursue it. By following this strategy you will likely bypass the best drug because it wasn't given a good trial. Believe me, I wish there was an easier way. You'll take more time hopping around from drug to drug and getting nowhere than you would focusing on good trials. We learn solid facts through good trials. Short trials tell us nothing. Just my experience.

 

Me and my big mouth ...

Posted by Bob on October 25, 1999, at 16:10:35

In reply to Re: Dr Jensen protocol, posted by JohnL on October 25, 1999, at 13:18:48

> Personally I would be hesitant.

Me, too. Toe the party line, there. But on other threads I've been spreading some pollyanna about keeping an open mind with respect to a number of different issues, so I thought it was time to practice what I preach.

I went to the site. First of all, the guy's horrible at web design. 2nd generation, use of the underline tag, poor page flow (in the route I followed, I actually went to the end of a logical thread and had to step backwards through it!). So, he definitely is spending time on something other than learning web design. Typical of anyone with something to sell, he does have testimonials. Not always so typical of people with something to sell is that he has credentials.

I'm no psychopharmer, but the structure of his particular approach it methodologically intriguing. Whereas a (positivist-empiricist) scientific approach would have you change one variable at a time, allowing a long enough trial of that change to gather what is deemed as appropriate information, Dr. Jensen takes more of a systems view. To me, it looks like a variation on cluster analysis or multidimensional scaling (statistical geekSpeak for ways of examining how lots of factors clump into working groups that produce coherent and mostly independent (from other groups) effects. The theoretical basis behind it is quite interesting.

So, for those more knowledgeable in matters psychotropic than me, you might want to hop in and take a look before passing judgment.

Bob

 

Re: Dr Jensen protocol

Posted by Carol on October 25, 1999, at 16:24:03

In reply to Re: Dr Jensen protocol, posted by JohnL on October 25, 1999, at 13:18:48

>Short trials tell us nothing. Just my experience.


I find this very interesting, considering that it is exactly the advice I have recently been given by my new Psychiatrist. My previous Dr. kept upping my meds. every 4 wks, then when I got to the highest dose, she added a new one to what I was already taking! By the time I got tired of so much medication and no results, I was on 375 mgs. Effexor, 60mgs.Prozac, 200Mgs. Wellbutrin, and 60mgs. ritalin, every single day! Now I am only on 400mgs. Wellbutrin, and have been advised to give it 12 weeks before determining that it is ineffective. It's been 4 wks so far, so we'll see...

 

Re: Dr Jensen protocol

Posted by Noa on October 25, 1999, at 21:40:52

In reply to Re: Dr Jensen protocol, posted by Carol on October 25, 1999, at 16:24:03

With some meds, initial negative effects wear off. For example, when I first started taking serzone, I had emotional agitation, dizziness, loss of balance, etc. but they all wore off after 2-3 weeks. If I had stopped after a few days, I wouldn't have know that. I know that there were several others on this board who shard similar stories with serzone (DEE, I think, is one, maybe Janet, too? Don't remember).

 

Re: Dr Jensen protocol

Posted by Cindy on October 25, 1999, at 21:51:39

In reply to Re: Dr Jensen protocol, posted by Noa on October 25, 1999, at 21:40:52

> With some meds, initial negative effects wear off. For example, when I first started taking serzone, I had emotional agitation, dizziness, loss of balance, etc. but they all wore off after 2-3 weeks. If I had stopped after a few days, I wouldn't have know that. I know that there were several others on this board who shard similar stories with serzone (DEE, I think, is one, maybe Janet, too? Don't remember).

Carol, I had some initial negative effects with Serzone too, but they wore off after about a week! So I agree with you in that trying a medication for a fair trial period helps. Depends on the side effects I guess and how intolerable they are!--Cindy

 

Medication selection is too random

Posted by MA on October 26, 1999, at 20:24:10

In reply to Re: Dr Jensen protocol, posted by Cindy on October 25, 1999, at 21:51:39

I believe there has to be a better way to find out what meds will work rather than the current methodology of trying different meds, increasing the dosage and adding additional meds to augment the first one.

One problem I have is knowing when a drug is working acceptably. I think a combination of meds is the answer, but how does one know when the combination is right.

The methods really doesn't seem to have any guidelines or ways to know if your symptoms are just minimized, rather than really gone.

I think alot of this is because I never really felt that good when I was depressed and although I am better on certain meds, I never feel comfortable with the current treatment since I never really trust that it will work or work for at least a year. Just when I think I'm in a safe zone, I get hit again and have to start the whole trial and error thing again

I feel like I spend way too much time with trying to fix myself rather than living my life. I'm so afraid to trust or accept good things because I lose them when I get depressed.

The future is so uncertain and I want to be able to trust in the medication working, but I can't because how do I know that I'm on the "right" drug at the"'right " dose and in combination with the right adjunctive meds.

For all you scientists, perhaps this is easier, because of your backgrounds, but I'm not always sure that my doctor has the right suggestions. He will listen to me and we collaborate on what to try next but he doesn't always seem to know what to try next.

This is why the Jensen Method sounds like it makes alot of sense to me. How would my doctor know to add, say Depakote, or so many of the other meds so many of you seem to have good luck on.

Why can't I find the right med and feel good for once in my life. At what point to you accept the way you feel rather than the elusive source for a better drug? Maybe I am feeling OK and that is enough, or is it????

 

Re: Medication selection is too random

Posted by saint james on October 29, 1999, at 3:50:58

In reply to Medication selection is too random, posted by MA on October 26, 1999, at 20:24:10

For me there is now question when something works.
If I have to ask "Is it working" it is not. This is provided I have been on an AD for at least a month. You cannot tell anything for weeks. The evidence of this well known.

Given that neurology is very complex we are just understanding the tips of what happens. Until we totally understand the how and why of depression
any method of understanding what will work for a given person is flawed. More the reason to get with a seasoned doc, because it is more art than science.

Given my 10+ years of being on AD's I would laff at anyone who says they could tell me if something would work in just a few days.

j

 

Re: Dr Jensen protocol

Posted by saint james on October 29, 1999, at 6:03:27

In reply to Dr Jensen protocol, posted by My name isn't missing!!!! on October 25, 1999, at 9:35:08

> This is about the 5th time I have tried to post a new thread and it keeps saying I forgot my name. I don't know what the problem is but here goes. I need to get some input on this.
>
> There is a website for this doctor (WWW.drjensen.com) that provides consultations in treating chemical imbalances with drug protocols,

James here....

Just saw the site and I do agree with some of this... ie "Listening to the drugs" to decide what a condition a person has. Good doc's have been doing this for some time as we know that AD's do nothing to normals but work on depressives, some drugs will make bi-polars manic, ect.

When i first got on AD's (and several did not work) my doc was very intrested in any effect the meds that did not work did to me..." I am learning more about your neurology, James" she would say.
All I can tell from the first few days is about sedation or side effects, and for me the side effects (most) lessen with time, so there is not way to tell unless I wait it out.

It too

 

Re: Dr Jensen protocol : NOT

Posted by Sean on October 29, 1999, at 15:15:43

In reply to Dr Jensen protocol, posted by My name isn't missing!!!! on October 25, 1999, at 9:35:08

> This is about the 5th time I have tried to post a new thread and it keeps saying I forgot my name. I don't know what the problem is but here goes. I need to get some input on this.
>
> There is a website for this doctor (WWW.drjensen.com) that provides consultations in treating chemical imbalances with drug protocols, including all of the various medications that have been used in most brain chemical imbalances.
>
> I know if it sounds too good to be true you shouldn't believe it but I am desparate to figure out what medication(s) would be the most helpful for me with chronic depression. Like so many of you I have tried most of the typical AD's but haven't tried alot of the other meds so many of you talk about with such familiarity. I am tired of trying and failing meds. I keep losing big chunks of time doing this and need to find the right med before I run out of time. No I'm not suicidal but sick of depression ruling my life.
>
> This doctor talks about trying various classifications of meds for brief period of time until the right med is identified. Oftentimes, I've told my doctor that when the med is right, I will usually know it in a day or two. This is part of the protocol since you only try meds for brief periods of time.
>
> Has anyone read about this protocol or have any insight into it and if I should pursue it???

I went to this sight and found it interesting from
a practical standpoint, but philosophically very
unsophisticated. Dr. Jensen claims to be "The
Psychiatry of the Future" but I'm not convinced.

Why?

Jensen is thinking purely in terms of the available
drugs of today and conceptualizing the "problem"
in terms of the transmitter or neural circuit systems
they affect. I'm of the opinion that the current
crop of meds are very crude and have an effect on
some "final common pathway" mediated by the
transmitter systems the drugs affect. I would be
willing to better a large sum of money that very
few people with depression are depressed due to
low serotonin alone. If that were the case, why would
an AD ever burn out? ANd how do we explain the
AD effect of drugs which act in novel or even in
*reverse* to the amine hypothesis. And the fact
that so many different drugs can produce the
same final effect (lifting mood) seems not to
argue for the specificity of the putative
transmitter systems themselves as being the
core problem. More likely a "cascade" of some
sort it put into play by these drugs and getting
this going in a particular person might require
tweaking one neural system or another.

So I think Jensen may have developed a method
for testing meds on people, but conceptually he
is off base. We are at the very beginning of
brain science. My money for the actual cause and
treatment of depression is going to be tweaking
the expression of neuropeptides specific to
brain structures which remain to be clearly
elucidated. Key systems are probably the
amygdala, hypothalamus, and perhaps specific
structures in the temporal lobe.

This class of drugs, when developed, will be
based on something other than a pharmacological
dissection of patients. Not that working from
the "outside in" is wrong - it must be done and
many lives have been saved. But to pass the
current state of the art off as "the answer" is
to my way of thinking, simply bullshit and
smacks of advertising hype.

Sean.

 

Re: Dr Jensen protocol : NOT

Posted by saint james on October 29, 1999, at 17:52:59

In reply to Re: Dr Jensen protocol : NOT, posted by Sean on October 29, 1999, at 15:15:43

> Jensen is thinking purely in terms of the available
> drugs of today and conceptualizing the "problem"
> in terms of the transmitter or neural circuit systems
> they affect. I'm of the opinion that the current
> crop of meds are very crude and have an effect on
> some "final common pathway" mediated by the
> transmitter systems the drugs affect. I would be
> willing to better a large sum of money that very
> few people with depression are depressed due to
> low serotonin alone. If that were the case, why would
> an AD ever burn out?

James here.....

Doc's often tell their patients depression is about low NT's but it is well known this is not the case. You can deplete all aminos in a normie and no depression happens. The pathway we understand at present is about holding more NT at a specific site, i.e stoping re uptake. Basically
holding what is already there.

I really laffed at this doc saying 20% of this and 30% of that. There is no way he can prove this, I think. He is just trying to sell a book.

Mood is very complex and any model we have at present is incomplete.

j

 

Re: Dr Jensen protocol : NOT

Posted by Bob on October 30, 1999, at 16:36:13

In reply to Re: Dr Jensen protocol : NOT, posted by saint james on October 29, 1999, at 17:52:59

All the same, he does one thing that very few doctors think is even reasonable to do -- his approach tries to examine mental disorders in a systemic way. Sure, "medical science" can describe what each of these individual systems are supposedly responsible for in terms of function, but how much gets beyond the idea of first-order effects? The standard protocol remains change one variable, wait until that change produces some sort of equilibrium, then evaluate that state to see if the protocol should be continued or changed. With our lack of precise understanding of how these neurochemical changes map onto behavior, this protocol really is scientifically bankrupt. It assumes that any change in behavior is solely determined by the change in protocol, and cannot account for any behavior that is determined or influenced by a variety of systems in the brain -- some of which may be aided by the change, some ignored, and others hampered.

It's this approach that leaves folks like me waiting for years to find the right combination of medicines. I hear people talk about meds pooping out after five years -- I've been on them more than 2.5 years and I still haven't found a combination that has the potential to poop out at some time in the future.

my two cents,
Bob

 

Re: Dr Jensen protocol : Worked for me

Posted by Phillip Marx on December 26, 1999, at 2:24:06

In reply to Re: Dr Jensen protocol : NOT, posted by Bob on October 30, 1999, at 16:36:13

The web site is not his highest priority, his brother is doing it for him until he has time to divert his attention from his patients and book.

I have been with him for two years and he got me off disability and gave me back a life after HMO types merely ran me through the traditional cheapest cost diagnosis decision tree that perpetuates revenue patient status. He is working hard on the next edition of his book, not just a book, but a text that several medical schools are using and will be using the next ready edition of. He takes patients who have been to 50-100 doctors and gets 30-60 percent much better relief in the first two weeks, some do take longer and there are about 30% who still have no medicines invented for them yet. Since he is systematic, he can do much of it over the phone, I hear blood tests are rare, just failed medicine histories help him best. The short tests only run a screen through some 10 main brain chemical systems so that he knows how many he is trying to fix. EVERYONE with TWO imbalances will be unimproved with treatments for single conditions!

Phillip Marx
PhilMarx@net999.com


> All the same, he does one thing that very few doctors think is even reasonable to do -- his approach tries to examine mental disorders in a systemic way. Sure, "medical science" can describe what each of these individual systems are supposedly responsible for in terms of function, but how much gets beyond the idea of first-order effects? The standard protocol remains change one variable, wait until that change produces some sort of equilibrium, then evaluate that state to see if the protocol should be continued or changed. With our lack of precise understanding of how these neurochemical changes map onto behavior, this protocol really is scientifically bankrupt. It assumes that any change in behavior is solely determined by the change in protocol, and cannot account for any behavior that is determined or influenced by a variety of systems in the brain -- some of which may be aided by the change, some ignored, and others hampered.
>
> It's this approach that leaves folks like me waiting for years to find the right combination of medicines. I hear people talk about meds pooping out after five years -- I've been on them more than 2.5 years and I still haven't found a combination that has the potential to poop out at some time in the future.
>
> my two cents,
> Bob

 

Re: Dr Jensen protocol : Worked for me

Posted by Phillip Marx on December 26, 1999, at 2:33:04

In reply to Re: Dr Jensen protocol : Worked for me, posted by Phillip Marx on December 26, 1999, at 2:24:06

Interview by the Doctor is online:
http://www.concernedcounseling.com/ccijournal/conference/jensendepression.htm
pm

> The web site is not his highest priority, his brother is doing it for him until he has time to divert his attention from his patients and book.
>
> I have been with him for two years and he got me off disability and gave me back a life after HMO types merely ran me through the traditional cheapest cost diagnosis decision tree that perpetuates revenue patient status. He is working hard on the next edition of his book, not just a book, but a text that several medical schools are using and will be using the next ready edition of. He takes patients who have been to 50-100 doctors and gets 30-60 percent much better relief in the first two weeks, some do take longer and there are about 30% who still have no medicines invented for them yet. Since he is systematic, he can do much of it over the phone, I hear blood tests are rare, just failed medicine histories help him best. The short tests only run a screen through some 10 main brain chemical systems so that he knows how many he is trying to fix. EVERYONE with TWO imbalances will be unimproved with treatments for single conditions!
>
> Phillip Marx
> PhilMarx@net999.com
>
>
> > All the same, he does one thing that very few doctors think is even reasonable to do -- his approach tries to examine mental disorders in a systemic way. Sure, "medical science" can describe what each of these individual systems are supposedly responsible for in terms of function, but how much gets beyond the idea of first-order effects? The standard protocol remains change one variable, wait until that change produces some sort of equilibrium, then evaluate that state to see if the protocol should be continued or changed. With our lack of precise understanding of how these neurochemical changes map onto behavior, this protocol really is scientifically bankrupt. It assumes that any change in behavior is solely determined by the change in protocol, and cannot account for any behavior that is determined or influenced by a variety of systems in the brain -- some of which may be aided by the change, some ignored, and others hampered.
> >
> > It's this approach that leaves folks like me waiting for years to find the right combination of medicines. I hear people talk about meds pooping out after five years -- I've been on them more than 2.5 years and I still haven't found a combination that has the potential to poop out at some time in the future.
> >
> > my two cents,
> > Bob


This is the end of the thread.


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] 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.