![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 19 of 19. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Big Mike on June 21, 2000, at 12:05:38
June 21
Dr. Nancy Snyderman raises
questions about the possible
negative side effects that
may accompany the use of
some of the most popular antidepressants.
Posted by noa on June 22, 2000, at 5:49:48
In reply to 20/20 Tonight, posted by Big Mike on June 21, 2000, at 12:05:38
I saw the promos, but I missed it, because I was tired and went to sleep early (had to be up early today). The promos showed clips of a woman seeming to have tic-like movements. That is of interest to me, as I have had this reaction to too much serotonin-type meds (paxil, effexor).
I only hope the show didn't make a sensationalist story out of it and scare people away from meds who could benefit from them if they are managed well, with a responsive doctor and all.
Can anyone give a synopsis?
Posted by LD on June 22, 2000, at 8:41:58
In reply to Re: 20/20 Tonight, posted by noa on June 22, 2000, at 5:49:48
They discussed one doctors theory that SSRIs can cause severe suicidial thoughts as a side effect. He supposedly gave 20 people without depression Prozac and 2 developed suicidial thoughts. So he's saying 1 in 10 people will have this side effect.
The women with the ticks developed them after taking Prozac and then another SSRI. It is now a permanent thing for her. I guess the drugs triggered the disease for her or something like that. It was very sad, although I don't think they can prove it was actually the drug that caused it. They said it was a very very rare side effect.
I'm not sure how I think they presented the information, because I tend to believe that it wasnt the Prozac causing the suicidial thoughts, but a worsening of depression, or in his study something else. For someone who doesnt have experience with ADs, they might be more scared now to try them, which is not good, because the benefits way outweigh the negatives. I was on Wellbutrin and developed suicidal thoughts, and that is not an SSRI. My depression just got worse.
Any other thoughts?
Posted by kazoo on June 22, 2000, at 9:04:49
In reply to Re: 20/20 Tonight- Synopsis, posted by LD on June 22, 2000, at 8:41:58
> Any other thoughts?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What's the plural of "synopsis"?
For a transcript: http://www.abcnews.go.com/onair/2020/000621_prozac_chat.html
All this means is that defense lawyers now have an additional two doctors on their
side: Dr. Joseph Glenmullen and Dr. Healy (English chap).Let's face it: lawyers ruined this country.
The best book I've read so far about this controversy is entitled:
"The Power to Harm," by John Cornwell.kazoo
Posted by Adam on June 22, 2000, at 11:27:10
In reply to Re: 20/20 Tonight- Synopsis, posted by kazoo on June 22, 2000, at 9:04:49
I saw the show also (don't watch TV normally, but got the tip from here!). What can I say? A lot of circumstantial evidence, but no proof. The skeptic will take the stories for what they are: potential rare occurrances without any science to give real cost-benefit estimates. The undiscerning or overly impressionistic will be terrified of psychiatry. Same old same-old, really. I can't see how anyone could have gotten any useful information from the story one way or the other. The only benefactors will be those who profit from ratings, and, as LD pointed out, attourneys who no longer require proof to win cases or settlements (along with hefty sums of cash), but rather enough emotional ammunition to influence the typical "jury of our peers". The sad fact is, most of our peers are so ignorant and intolerant of the subject that they are not qualified to be a part of the judgement process. The same is true of many in the media (omitting those who do know better, but sacrifice ethics for Nielson Ratings).
If we need any evidence of this, look at the enormously dispropotionate number of minorities on death row, or serving manditory life sentances for drug offenses, and the sensationalized and skewed portrayal of these individuals in the media.
This may sound like a screed, but I am rather phlegmatic about the whole subject at this point. There is, as they say, plenty of empirical data to support my impressions. There is also plenty of empirical data about antidepressants, and much more could be gotten with increased impartial and peer-reviewed research. Engage and fund those who are providing us with this real service, not the McInfo pushers in the American courts and media. They serve only themselves.
> > Any other thoughts?
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> What's the plural of "synopsis"?
>
> For a transcript: http://www.abcnews.go.com/onair/2020/000621_prozac_chat.html
>
> All this means is that defense lawyers now have an additional two doctors on their
> side: Dr. Joseph Glenmullen and Dr. Healy (English chap).
>
> Let's face it: lawyers ruined this country.
>
> The best book I've read so far about this controversy is entitled:
> "The Power to Harm," by John Cornwell.
>
> kazoo
Posted by noa on June 22, 2000, at 12:02:04
In reply to Re: 20/20 Tonight- Synopsis, posted by Adam on June 22, 2000, at 11:27:10
Thanks for the synopses and the link to the transcript.
I guess I stand by my general thought that good care from a responsive, astute and attuned psychopharmocologist is key, whether there are small but significant risks from these meds, or whether there might be a rare risk due to a predisposition to a neurological disorder.
I also agree that the 2 out of 20 anecdotal report is hardly scientific, and the televised report about it could end up doing more harm than good, but I am not willing to discount it altogether. I think it is possible for some individuals to have adverse psychiatric or neurological (or other physiological) reactions to some drugs. I think we all know how much variation there is among all of us. Look at how I experienced increase mood lability and rage as an initial effect of serzone. It is important for us to consider these anecdotes as valid, for what they are, so that when a patient is initiating a med, they and the doc can look out for early signs of such adverse reactions. I agree, though, that it hardly is cause for wholesale panic about the medications themselves.
I wonder---Did they address the attentiveness of the doctors in these cases and how closely the initiation of meds was monitored, how much communication there was between doc and patient, etc? I would probably go after the managed care companies before going after the drug companies!!
Posted by harry b. on June 22, 2000, at 12:57:51
In reply to 20/20 Tonight, posted by Big Mike on June 21, 2000, at 12:05:38
I did not see it, TV sat service temporarily down
due to prioritizing expenses. OK, they cut me off
cause I didn't pay my bill.I wish 20/20 would do an in depth segment on depression,
not a sensational grab for ratings but a balanced
and educated documentary that explains the
biological and situational/environmental causes,
the multitudinous debilitating effects, the treatment
options, the FACTS, in an effort to enlighten and
destigmatize. Probably too much to ask of network
TV.My wish is altruistic, but also selfish. My depression
and its manifestations contributed greatly to the
loss of my friend/father-figure and surrogate family.
He doesn't watch much TV but always watches the news
and 20/20.I wish I could fathom Stephen Hawking's theories
on the physics of the universe too, but wishes are
wishes and seldom come true.hb- sad & lonely today
Posted by Adam on June 22, 2000, at 14:32:52
In reply to Re: 20/20 Tonight- Synopsis, posted by Adam on June 22, 2000, at 11:27:10
>The undiscerning or overly impressionistic will be terrified of psychiatry.
Of course I should have said the overly impressionable, not "impressionistic". Though it may help one be impressionistic if they are a bit more impressionable than the average person, one does not equal the other. ;)
My brain cracks me up...sometimes. :)
Posted by kazoo on June 22, 2000, at 15:11:26
In reply to Re: 20/20 Tonight, posted by harry b. on June 22, 2000, at 12:57:51
> I did not see it, TV sat service temporarily down
> due to prioritizing expenses. OK, they cut me off
> cause I didn't pay my bill.
>
> hb- sad & lonely today
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Gee, Harry, you can come over to my house and watch TV anytime.
It's 65" across.
I'll even make popcorn with butter and lithium chloride.
A splendid time is guaranteed for all!Keep smiling! :-)
kazoo
Posted by Steph on June 22, 2000, at 20:57:05
In reply to Re: 20/20 Tonight, posted by kazoo on June 22, 2000, at 15:11:26
>
> I missed the begininng of the segment. I was really concerned to hear them label the woman's tremors as Tardive dyskinesia. I knew that it is usually a side effect of some of the stronger psychotrophic meds. but I was very surprised to hear it linked to ADs. I am on Celexa. She got this reaction from Prozac. I wonder how long she was on it and what she mixed with it. It bothered me because I have an uncle on some heavy duty stuff---well he's supposed to take it--right now he is incarcerated. He has TD. I hope it the 20/20 piece was sensationalism. But the truth is all these meds are new and what effects occcur over prolong periods? I don't know. Maybe I will search out the book mentioned in a previous thread. Take care all. Steph on celexa 20mg 5 weeks and doing great.
Posted by Abby on June 22, 2000, at 22:56:32
In reply to Re: 20/20 Tonight, posted by Steph on June 22, 2000, at 20:57:05
very good. It gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "salt substitute".
Abby
Posted by harry b. on June 22, 2000, at 23:12:27
In reply to Re: 20/20 Tonight, posted by kazoo on June 22, 2000, at 15:11:26
> > I did not see it, TV sat service temporarily down
> > due to prioritizing expenses. OK, they cut me off
> > cause I didn't pay my bill.
> >
> > hb- sad & lonely today
> >
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Gee, Harry, you can come over to my house and watch TV anytime.
> It's 65" across.
> I'll even make popcorn with butter and lithium chloride.
> A splendid time is guaranteed for all!
>
> Keep smiling! :-)
>
> kazooThank you, kazoo. I got a much needed chuckle from
that.
My very best wishes to you,
hb
Posted by quilter on June 22, 2000, at 23:41:44
In reply to Re: 20/20 Tonight » kazoo, posted by harry b. on June 22, 2000, at 23:12:27
I was perturbed by the study by Dr.Healy. His group of subjects was much too small (n=20) to make a valid study, and was composed of "normal" subjects with no history of depression or suicidal ideation.
Seems to me that one should expect to have unusual results when you amplify normal people's serotonin levels by administering a SSRI. The length of the study was also only 2 weeks - another flaw in my opinion ( but a good thing for the poor subjects).
I expected better of 20/20 than the same junk science all over the media these days. They did have the information in the report but how many will remember only the skewed "headlines" instead of the facts?
Posted by Angela5 on June 23, 2000, at 0:02:29
In reply to Re: 20/20 Tonight » kazoo, posted by harry b. on June 22, 2000, at 23:12:27
So, let me get this straight... ;)
Harry, we're all going to our nearest airports, and you're going to pick us up and fly us to kazoo's?? ;)
Posted by harry b. on June 23, 2000, at 1:52:31
In reply to Re: 20/20 Tonight - kazoo harryb, posted by Angela5 on June 23, 2000, at 0:02:29
> So, let me get this straight... ;)
>
> Harry, we're all going to our nearest airports, and you're going to pick us up and fly us to kazoo's?? ;)My 2nd chuckle. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
But, my little aeroplane only has 2 seats. Maybe
a lottery? But first we have to find out where
the kind kazoo abides.
hb
Posted by noa on June 23, 2000, at 8:46:57
In reply to Re: 20/20 Tonight - kazoo harryb, posted by harry b. on June 23, 2000, at 1:52:31
Us folks who been around awhile know kazoo is in Connecticut, because of his reports of how bad the UCONN care was for him.
Posted by Renee N on June 24, 2000, at 1:54:32
In reply to Re: 20/20 Tonight - kazoo harryb, posted by harry b. on June 23, 2000, at 1:52:31
Remember our "conversation" a while back about flying? Forget the lottery...put me on top of the list. I think a flight in a small plane could be just whjat the doctor ordered. At least it would be if he knew me better than our 15 minute medcheck appointments allow...Renee N
Posted by harry b. on June 24, 2000, at 8:49:34
In reply to Hey, Flyboy!, posted by Renee N on June 24, 2000, at 1:54:32
> Remember our "conversation" a while back about flying? Forget the lottery...put me on top of the list. I think a flight in a small plane could be just whjat the doctor ordered. At least it would be if he knew me better than our 15 minute medcheck appointments allow...Renee N
Thanks for reminding me! You are now at the top of
the list AND you will be the co-pilot!
hbPS- re: 15 minute med checks. I just found out that
that my insurance considers a med check and a full
hour session with the pdoc as the same. They pay
by sessions, not length of session. The diagnostic
and billing codes have to meet their criteria tho,
so maybe check into it.
Posted by Renee N on June 25, 2000, at 2:11:32
In reply to Re: Hey, Flyboy! » Renee N, posted by harry b. on June 24, 2000, at 8:49:34
Thanks, Harry---for the ride and the tip! Renee N
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.