![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 38. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Jeroen on September 22, 2005, at 11:35:41
WARNING GEODON 50% TARDIVE DYSKINESIA RISK
please to anyone who wants to try taking geodon, i took it for 3 weeks 20 mg lowest dosage and my eyes are damaged, uncontrollable movements, excessive eye blinking
other side effects i had on it, HARDCORE ANXIETY, AKATHASIA, WEIGHT GAIN, FELT LIKE A ZOMBIE, MY HEART RACING, FELT NOT ALIVE, DYSTONIA propably
1 year off this dumb psychiatric evolution thing, and still have it
QUIT IMMEDIATELLY IF YOU HAVE UNCONTROLLABLE MOVEMENTS ON YOUR BODY!
thanks for reading, i might have saved one life for sure and thats enough
do a search on google and youll find positive and negative things about it...I taught this medicine was my magic bullet but no way :(
im on seroquel now and im ok but still suffer from TD
thanks for reading and enjoy the rest of your day :)
Posted by Chairman_MAO on September 22, 2005, at 11:40:25
In reply to WARNING GEODON 50% TARDIVE DYSKINESIA RISK, posted by Jeroen on September 22, 2005, at 11:35:41
There are many treatments for TD. Buspirone, benzodiazepines, amantadine/other DA agonists, etc.
In fact, I'll bet if you combined the three above you'd be MUCH happier.There is no reason your TD should not be treated!
Posted by yxibow on September 22, 2005, at 16:06:51
In reply to Re: WARNING GEODON 50% TARDIVE DYSKINESIA RISK » Jeroen, posted by Chairman_MAO on September 22, 2005, at 11:40:25
> There are many treatments for TD. Buspirone, benzodiazepines, amantadine/other DA agonists, etc.
> In fact, I'll bet if you combined the three above you'd be MUCH happier.
>
> There is no reason your TD should not be treated!
And there's another average factor or rule of thumb about TD. Roughly 30% of people with TD remit (lose) the symptoms. Another 30% get no worse, and the remaining 30% may not lose the TD. So you have at least a 2/3 chance of staying the same or getting better.Switching to a different antipsychotic also can make a difference, including Clozaril (which is not without its own problems but you have to make the choice between the lesser of two evils).
Rates of severe movement disorders have not been seen at a "50%" rate in the atypical antipsychotics. That is up there with Haldol.
Now, I do definately sympathize with you about your condition. But there are other factors that could have contributed to TD. Prior use of non atypical antipsychotics increase the chance as well. As a rough estimate, I recall a British Journal of Psychiatry extensive assessment that estimated the TD from Zyprexa at around 1/2% per year, give or take.
Geodon and Risperdal are higher potency medications than Zyprexa and Seroquel in terms of their binding to the part of the brain that can cause TD, this is true. But it is nowhere in the realm of 50% in any short period. It would take years from what we currently know at the moment. Unfortunately you are one of the small groups of people who have developed TD for whatever reason, and don't deny me, I can really understand your anguish.I live in the back of my mind that Seroquel could give me TD but I can't spend my entire day on it because it gives me more value than detraction.
I know you have suffered from TD and have posted on this here before and we all do feel for you. It is unfortunate that 50 years after the introduction of antipsychotics TD is still a factor, but this is the best we have in 2005 and I do think the future will bring potentially brighter options.
I think you have to try the different methods, such as switching antipsychotics, and the ones the other poster mentioned, each for a much longer period of time before giving up on them. It will take time, but there is a definate chance that you will lose the symptoms to a great degree. Has your doctor been monitoring you on the AIMS (Abnormal Involuntary Movement) scale ? You should be evaluated on a fairly often basis for the strength of your TD to track your progress.
Warmest Regards-J
Posted by xjs7 on September 22, 2005, at 18:38:11
In reply to WARNING GEODON 50% TARDIVE DYSKINESIA RISK, posted by Jeroen on September 22, 2005, at 11:35:41
You know, it all depends on what illness you are treating. For 99% of regular non-psychotic depression, at least half of bipolar disorder, etc. etc. antipsychotics are not justified. And, as med_empowered has mentioned, people with mood disorders are more likely to get TD anyways.
If you have serious psychosis, there is no question whether your illness is more important to treat than TD is unpleasant. If you are taking APs and don't need them, you are more likely to get TD. It just isn't worth it unless you have schizophrenia or psychotic mania. Even psychotic mania can be treated with mood stabilizers alone, sometimes.
I would be the last person to say how wonderful APs--new and old--are, but for certain illnesses they are needed. If you have one of these illnesses, just take your meds and go on with life. If you don't have one of these illnesses, by all means, take an antidepressant or mood stabilizer or benzodiazepine!
And there is another issue--some people with schizophrenia already have TD-like symptoms, before ever taking an AP. The people who should be taking these drugs are severely afflictted and need the effect the drugs provide. If you don't, then don't take them.
Some of the people on this board have been in the hospital with psychosis. I have. I would never suggest to these people that these drugs are doing more harm than good. To these people, the small risk of developing tardive dyskinesia is nothing compared to the benefit they receive.
And, for what it is worth, I take 12x that amount of Geodon and don't have ANY side effects from it. I have been on Geodon since soon after it was introduced in the US. It has been a fine medication for me.
Posted by blueberry on September 22, 2005, at 19:29:14
In reply to WARNING GEODON 50% TARDIVE DYSKINESIA RISK, posted by Jeroen on September 22, 2005, at 11:35:41
A lot of drugs can cause tardive dyskinesia. There are tons of reports of it happening with prozac, zoloft, paxil, and of course any antipsychotic.
I believe I have severe tardive akathisia, from low dose prozac and low dose zyprexa over five years. It's been getting slowly but progressively worse beginning 7 months ago, after doing fine with no problems for 5 years.
My doctor is calling it anxiety. I think he's insane. He has no idea. I totally agree with you, tardive dyskinesias of all types are pure hell.
Treatments can help or even get rid of it though. But just as we have to experiment to find out what works for our depression, we also have to experiment with things to help the dyskinesia. There are things that can help.
I've found low dose remeron to be the most helpful so far, and xanax helps too. But there are plenty of choices including anticholinergic meds, clonidine, inderal, buspirone, benzos, dopamine agonists, gabapentin, or even a simple supplement of magnesium glycinate. Here is a strange one for you...my akathisia can be totally eliminated by taking st johns wort. It's just that after about 3 months, it actually makes me very depressed, and then when I stop, the akathisia returns with a vengence.
Try different things. Something will help. Unfortunatly, these antipsychotics are prescribed for all kinds of things from bipolar to insomnia to depression to agitation to anxiety, but can end up causing much more severe problems either in the short term or the long term. And even common household meds like prozac, zoloft, and paxil are guilty as hell.
Posted by Phillipa on September 22, 2005, at 20:15:35
In reply to Re: WARNING GEODON 50% TARDIVE DYSKINESIA RISK, posted by blueberry on September 22, 2005, at 19:29:14
Jeroen it sounds like you got a lot of information. Fondly, Phillipa
Posted by Chairman_MAO on September 22, 2005, at 21:14:19
In reply to Re: WARNING GEODON 50% TARDIVE DYSKINESIA RISK, posted by xjs7 on September 22, 2005, at 18:38:11
As I jsut said in another post, no one should have to take these things unless it is a LAST DITCH effort.
People should take barbiturates for anxiety before antipsychotics. The only reason they are used so often is beacuse of the drug policy--and because they're a cash cow for pharma companies. Back before they existed, barbs were routinely used with great success for even things like manic psychosis. Opioids are antipsychotic as well, and way safer.
Posted by yxibow on September 23, 2005, at 0:26:06
In reply to My opinion on antipsychotics » xjs7, posted by Chairman_MAO on September 22, 2005, at 21:14:19
> As I jsut said in another post, no one should have to take these things unless it is a LAST DITCH effort.
People with moderate to severe schizophrenia really have no choice but to take antipsychotics, whether they be atypical or old line. There was an article in the Wall Street Journal, and also on Google News in the past few days describing a large NIH study between perphenazine and zyprexa and other atypicals. The opinion was that except for EPS the treatment was similar for schizophrenia. I happen to somewhat disagree, I think there still is a greater risk with the old line antipsychotics for TD but that is up to debate.
If you live in Southern California, and you go walk on the beach in Santa Monica, you will see the people who are not taking antipsychotics. They were let out of the mental hospitals in the 1960s and 1970s when money ran out and the whole system of treating patients changed. Now the beaches of (and I will admit I am a liberal myself but...) the very liberal city of Santa Monica are flooded daily with the homeless, a great deal of whom have schizophreniform disorders. A lot more could be done for them if they got treatment. It is a sad comment on life.>
> People should take barbiturates for anxiety before antipsychotics.Barbiturates were replaced by benzodiazepines for a very good reason. One (and please NOBODY do this at ALL) could swallow part of a jar of Valium and still be on earth tomorrow with some incredible discomfort and hospitalization. Seconal, and you would have an epitaph in the newspaper. They have only limited usage today for specialized conditions.
>>The only reason they are used so often is beacuse of the drug policy--and because they're a cash cow for pharma companies.
The novel atypicals I will agree are expensive on the schizophreniform disorder industry. Schizophreniform disorders cost more than $2 billion US a year, just in this country.But for some people, despite the cost, the atypicals are less harsh on the system and have considerable less EPS. It all depends on the individual.
Some may not have much EPS at all and can take old line drugs like Orap or Mellaril or the whole list of them (although Haldol is the worst example).
But some with schizoaffective disorder, the new line drugs are the only reasonable choice -- a number of people with affective disorders have a greater risk for TD and greater amounts of EPS
>Opioids are antipsychotic as well, and way safer.
Opiods are very experimental and are used by doctors who risk their medical license and malpractice insurance for prescribing medications that are, whether you feel to agree or not, way outside the scope of psychopharmacology. It would be like my psychopharmacologist prescribing Accutane. It just isn't in the general realm of practice.
Posted by tizza on September 23, 2005, at 4:46:23
In reply to My opinion on antipsychotics » xjs7, posted by Chairman_MAO on September 22, 2005, at 21:14:19
I despise anti psychotics. They turn most people into walking vegetables. Everyone is different, but they do work for some.
Posted by med_empowered on September 23, 2005, at 5:18:42
In reply to Re: My opinion on antipsychotics » Chairman_MAO, posted by yxibow on September 23, 2005, at 0:26:06
hey! To the original poster..I am truly sorry that you developed TD; I don't know why you were given Geodon or how severe your symptoms are, but I empathize with your situation and I urge you to try to find someone to help you treat it.
Now about the neuroleptics/antipsychotics...one thing I read that I thought was interesting is that the term "antipsychotic" wasn't coined by psychiatrists or patients; it was coined by the pharmaceutical industry. In the late 1940s, Thorazine was synthesized. It was being used as a pre-operative sedative in the early 50s in Paris when some docs thought that the calming, tranquilizing effect it had on patients could be of use to the institutionalized psychiatric patients of that era. So...patients were given Thorazine. In the actual study, Thorazine was never called an antipsychotic. The docs never claimed that it treated psychosis or restored people to stability. In fact, Deniker, one of the docs in the trial, referred to Thorazine as a "chemical lobotomy;" thorazine was also referred to as a "pharmacological substitute for lobotomy". Patients weren't treated and then released; they were treated and kept in the wards, where the docs and staff were happy that they were quiet and not causing so much trouble. The term "neuroleptic" was coined to describe Thorazine; it means "nerve-seizing," because Thorazine was (rightly) seen as seizing the mind of the patient, making him or her less spontaneous, less emotional, less human. It was also noted at the time Thorazine caused what is now known as EPS; unlike today, though, the docs also noticed that it caused symptoms similar to encephalitis lethargica, a brain-damaging illness that popped up somewhat regularly in the past. Interestingly enough, while someone has encephalitis lethargica, they are act similarly to those treated with Thorazine; after the disease, the brain is often damaged in such a way that the person has involuntary movements for the rest of their lives. So it is with Thorazine and the other antipyshoctics. Anyway, when the decision was made to market Thorazine, it was suddenly transformed from a "chemical lobtomy" into a "revolutionary treatment for insanity," and the drug promptly began a revolution in psychiatry (and society at large). Its worth noting that, until about 1964, Thorazine was believed to work primarily by an unusual form of sedation--"sedation without necrosis"--not through some sort of magical, anti-psychotic action specific to those with schizophrenia. The dopamine theory of schizophrenia was developed after studying how *existing* drugs for schizophrenia worked, not how the minds of those diagnosed with the disorder functioned or mal-fucntioned. The idea that antipsychotics "correct" some sort of "chemical imbalance" is not only weak, its not even an "idea" or "theory" in the truest sense of the word; its based on the observation that the damaging, much-despised drugs given to those with schizophrenia (often against their will) dampen dopamine. So..basically, we don't *know* that dopamine malfunction causes schizophrenia, but we do know that if you dampen dopamine enough you can make a patient shut up and quit making trouble. Now, the atypicals supposedly represent some sort of revolution in the world of psychiatry, but there seem to be two groups of people who benefit most from this supposed "revolution": drug companies and psychiatrists. Drug companies, of course, can now charge outrageous prices for drugs that are only marginally better than the old meds and still claim that they are "on the cutting edge of schizophrenia treatment." Please. They may well be on the "cutting edge" of false advertising and price gouging, but their reformulated Haldols don't represent all that much of an advance in improving the lives of those with schizophrenia. Since the atypicals have been in use, suicide rates in schizophrenia have *not* fallen, employment rates have *not* risen, and the numbers of people recovering has *not* increased--in fact, "recovery" from schizophrenia is viewed, in industrialized nations at least, as impossible; once schizophrenic, always schizophrenic, forever and amen. (In developing countries such as India, this view is rejected--and it appears that many, perhaps most, schizophrenics do in fact recover, with or without high-priced drugs). Then there are the psychiatrists, who are now RXing these expensive, side-effect ridden pills for everything from florid psychosis to mild insomnia. They benefit by being able to claim that they are, in fact, helping people, empowering people with their skills and expertise. Overall, its not true. Schizophrenia tends to be diagnosed unusually often among minorities (especially immigrants) and the poor. These are the people in society who are already at the fringe, who have already been victimized. What, exactly, does giving such a person Seroquel do? Fine, the "symptoms" are under "control". Do they have housing? Are their lives fulfilling, productive, enjoyable--in other words, worth living? It amazes me that psychiatrists demand the right to forcibly hospitalize and treat "schizophrenics," but they give a blank stare when asked if perhaps the money would be better spent offering these people food and shelter while leaving their brains alone. I read a study recently in which they found that when you factor in things that aren't usually counted in company studies--like social isolation, personal fulfillment, basically happiness--life hasn't improved all that much for those with schizophrenia. And, what does it say to the rest of us when psychiatrists prescribe these harsh drugs for things like depression and anxiety? To me, it betrays an utter and complete lack of respect for those of us trying to improve our lives. Depressed? Take this mind-numbing drug that costs lots of $$$, may cause TD and/or diabetes/weight gain, may cause akathisia, and will in general do little more than calm you down and make you more placid. Treatment? That isn't treatment. For too long, psychiatric "treatment" has meant subtracting from the personality, from the soul of the very person ostensibly being "saved" or "treated". This is definitely the case with neuroleptics, especially when given to the non-psychotic. And yes, I know...neuroleptics supposedly emptied out the mental hospitals (that's a myth, actually; government policy, not medication, did that) and they were/are "amazing," etc. etc. Its not true. The very fact that we ever *had* people suffering in the back wards of dirty, understaffed hospitals shows just how little psychiatry (and much of society) values the "insane". Talking to yourself? Seeing things? How about we throw you in an asylum, isolated from the rest of humanity, for the next 10-15 years, all the while preventing you from escaping or even trying to live a life outside? Is that *treatment*? Is that *respect* ? Of course not. The problem with neuroleptics is part of a bigger problem--psychiatry's constant degradation, abuse, labelling, and mistreatment of those it aims to "treat". Think about it: when was the last time a cardiologist had someone tossed into a hospital against their will for years because of "treatment resistant illness?" The potential is there--and it is realized sometimes--for psychiatrists and psychiatry in general to work *for* those in need of help, to truly *empower* people to lead productive lives. But the lure of money (from drug companies) and power (over the lives of "patients") has made psychiatry less a helping profession than a system of control and sometimes even imprisonment behind a medical facade. If you've read this far, sorry this was so long and ramblng--I just kind of pumped this out while sitting here at my computer, thinking over the experiences I've had or seen or heard about. No, I'm not "anti-psychiatry" or a "flat-earther". I am, however, strongly, staunchly "pro-humanity" and "pro-freedom"; these values define myself and my life, and they are increasingly at odds with psychiatry, at least as it is currently practiced.
Posted by xbunny on September 23, 2005, at 5:57:09
In reply to NEUROLEPTICS, posted by med_empowered on September 23, 2005, at 5:18:42
I would like to say that antipsychotic drugs markedly improved my life for the better.
I find the argument that antipsychotics drugs shouldnt be called that but rather mind seizers or a chemical labotomy rather flimsy. As a consumer I couldnt care less if they were called whatever derogatory term you care to apply to them, the value to me is too great to dismiss these drugs as tools of social control or some great business plan to exploit the vulnerable.
I find the implication that people who take antipsychotics are stripping themselves of thier humanity, emotions and are less spantaneous outrightly offensive. Without antipsychotics I am barely able to talk, unable to maintain any kind of stable emotion, unable to have meaningful contact with the world outside my head. My experience is not isolated there are many like me. Antipsychotics do have horrible side effects and even some of the intended effects are horrible but the alternative is far worse for me and I reckon for plenty of others too.
Maybe taking an antipsychotic will not get you a home or a job and I wholly agree that a comprehensive social care program is needed for the vulnerable but to make the connection that antipsychotics are responsible for this shortcoming is illogical. Antipsychotics and social care can happily coexist.
In short I would like to say that antipsychotics are valueable tools in the treatment of psychotic disorders. They do not solve all the problems but to brand them useless and the sock puppets of an unfeeling business machine is plain wrong.Bunny
Posted by Declan on September 23, 2005, at 14:45:41
In reply to My opinion on antipsychotics » xjs7, posted by Chairman_MAO on September 22, 2005, at 21:14:19
There's probably more people than we think who have treated their (semi)psychotic states with opiates for a decade or so. I know a couple. Opiates are antipsychotic IMO.
Declan
Posted by ed_uk on September 23, 2005, at 16:11:30
In reply to NEUROLEPTICS, posted by med_empowered on September 23, 2005, at 5:18:42
Say I was having a panic attack... I'd rather take a Seconal than an antipsychotic ;-)
~ed
Posted by linkadge on September 23, 2005, at 16:15:55
In reply to Re: My opinion on antipsychotics » Chairman_MAO, posted by Declan on September 23, 2005, at 14:45:41
I totally agree with what med empowered has said.
Linkadge
Posted by linkadge on September 23, 2005, at 16:25:13
In reply to Re: My opinion on antipsychotics, posted by linkadge on September 23, 2005, at 16:15:55
It's the same thing with depression. We say to ourselves, I'm so glad we have antidepressants, I wonder what they would have done in the olden days.
They got better is what they did. Three generations back in our family has suffered depressive episodes. But none has lasted more than 6-8 months, and then they got better. Better, as in, were no longer depressed.
I thought, well, we live in an age where I don't have to go through this, I can get better with pills.
So I take the AD's. Sure, I initally felt good, but soon enough that effect pooped out. I've been medicating for like 6 years now. That is more time than the cumulative depressions of my whole family. We think we can fool the brain, but we cannot.
And now, not only am I still depressed, but my brain is fried by the meds, I have permanent neurological defects.
So it comes down to how you want to take your pain, fast and get it over with, or slow and lingering.
Linkadge
Posted by crazy teresa on September 23, 2005, at 21:10:23
In reply to NEUROLEPTICS, posted by med_empowered on September 23, 2005, at 5:18:42
You wrote: Depressed? Take this mind-numbing drug that costs lots of $$$, may cause TD and/or diabetes/weight gain, may cause akathisia, and will in general do little more than calm you down and make you more placid. Treatment? That isn't treatment. For too long, psychiatric "treatment" has meant subtracting from the personality, from the soul of the very person ostensibly being "saved" or "treated".
What would you suggest as treatment for depression?crazy t
Posted by crazy teresa on September 23, 2005, at 21:13:29
In reply to Re: My opinion on antipsychotics, posted by linkadge on September 23, 2005, at 16:25:13
Wait it out instead of meds?
crazy teresa
Posted by Guy on September 23, 2005, at 21:44:30
In reply to WARNING GEODON 50% TARDIVE DYSKINESIA RISK, posted by Jeroen on September 22, 2005, at 11:35:41
Zyprexa has recently helped me claw my way out of a suicidal cesspit. All summer long I struggled with crippling anxiety and suicidal thoughts (but no psychosis). Nevertheless, I was proud of myself for "getting by" without resorting to anti-psychotics. Finally, this fall, I was so suicidal, I started again (after a four month hiatus) on 5 mg Zyprexa combined with 1.5 mg clonazepam. The change for the better has been nothing short of miraculous. I know I can slide back down into the hole again at any moment, but for now I am just happy to have the knife removed from my throat. Deep down I suspect my brain has been severely damaged by all the meds I have tried over the past nine years...if I had to do it all over again, I wouldn't touch a pharmaceutical with a barge pole. But that's all water under the bridge and now I have to make the best of a bad situation--both for myself and for the people I live with. You really have to have walked a mile in my shoes to know what I'm talking about.
Posted by crazy teresa on September 23, 2005, at 22:35:00
In reply to Re: WARNING GEODON 50% TARDIVE DYSKINESIA RISK, posted by Guy on September 23, 2005, at 21:44:30
Posted by linkadge on September 24, 2005, at 10:01:57
In reply to linkadge what would you suggest for depression? » linkadge, posted by crazy teresa on September 23, 2005, at 21:13:29
I don't know what I'd recommend.
Therapy, vaccation, exercise, religion, stress management techniques, nutritional approaches, major lifestyle changes, smoking ...
I know that many have tried all of the above without sucess. But even if one can lessen the symptoms and wait it out, I think the course of illness would be much better.
I know that some people do get better on pills (or so I've been told) but know dozens of people on meds, and I know that once they start the picture just gets more and more complex.
I found out my older brother had some depressive episodes (suicidal), but he refused to medicate for them, and instead got counselling through the church. It lasted a typical 6 months. It may have been harder for him to go through, but we both know that the toll the depression took was not as bad as the toll the meds took on me.
Linkadge
Posted by Declan on September 24, 2005, at 15:25:54
In reply to NEUROLEPTICS, posted by med_empowered on September 23, 2005, at 5:18:42
Med_empowered, that was a great post. Thankyou.
I thought, or read, but maybe dreamt it, that phenothiazine was a disinfectant or something, which was used to clean the excrement off the walls of mental hospitals. The patients calmed down and......maybe I read it in Laing or Cooper.
Declan
Posted by med_empowered on September 24, 2005, at 17:05:51
In reply to Re: NEUROLEPTICS, posted by Declan on September 24, 2005, at 15:25:54
hey! Yeah, from what I understand, phenothiazines were used first in industrial type applications (for some reason, I seem to recall reading about phenothiazine-type pesticides/insecticides that preceeded Thorazine) and then were later used in medicine, ending up primarily as psychiatric drugs.
Posted by Declan on September 24, 2005, at 17:39:10
In reply to to DECLAN..., posted by med_empowered on September 24, 2005, at 17:05:51
Posted by crazy teresa on September 24, 2005, at 17:53:01
In reply to Re: linkadge what would you suggest for depression?, posted by linkadge on September 24, 2005, at 10:01:57
> Therapy, vaccation, exercise, religion, stress management techniques, nutritional approaches, major lifestyle changes, smoking ...Hmmm. What kind of major lifestyle changes? Killing my husband and kids? LOL!!! Are you implying Tom Cruise is on the right track? :~} I would LOVE to be in the country where there is peace and quiet. I'm sooo much less agitated there.
> I know that many have tried all of the above without sucess. But even if one can lessen the symptoms and wait it out, I think the course of illness would be much better.
>
> I know that some people do get better on pills (or so I've been told) but know dozens of people on meds, and I know that once they start the picture just gets more and more complex.
>
I've been thinking that way. It started out for just a few months until the depression subsided. Now it's been years. Once they've gotten us hooked, it's a bitch to get off.> I found out my older brother had some depressive episodes (suicidal), but he refused to medicate for them, and instead got counselling through the church. It lasted a typical 6 months. It may have been harder for him to go through, but we both know that the toll the depression took was not as bad as the toll the meds took on me.
Good for your brother! He must have an amazing church.
Posted by linkadge on September 24, 2005, at 19:54:20
In reply to Re: linkadge what would you suggest for depression? » linkadge, posted by crazy teresa on September 24, 2005, at 17:53:01
Tom Cruise came across as sounding like he thought depression was not a real illness, that it was made up.
I fully believe that depression can be a serious illness. I don't undermine it's potential to ruin life. But in some ways I do agree with Tom in that the science behind the treatments is simply not too sound.
I know the drugs have an ability to destroy life.
I have seen quite a few lives destroyed by psychiatric drugs. Primarily my mother's life has been destroyed by tricyclic antidepressants, and antipscyhotics.
You need to find your own path, but I would be lying If I sat here and told you that I thought they were safe and effective.
When you're happy on the drugs, it is hard to imagine what kinds of things they could be doing to the underlying brain.
I heard a recording of myself playing a mozart piano sonata, when I was 16 yrs old. I was studying for a piano exam.
I have not stopped playing the piano since then, but I suspected that I was getting worse. When I heard the recording I wept bitterly for days, because I knew that there was no way on earth that I could make my hands move like they did back then. I knew in the back of my mind that I could not play like I did, but when I heard the recording it hit home hard.
My brain is dammaged. I know that doctors don't give a crap when I tell them this, but at this stage of the game I am not looking for somebody to tell me that they didn't dammage my brain. I know dammage has been done, I just wish somebody would believe me. I know Jaroen would believe me.
I am not trying to minimalize the depressive illness, but I cannot sit here and defend the drugs used to treat it.
Linkadge
Go forward in 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.