![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 11 of 11. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by becksA on December 20, 2006, at 23:34:18
I was searching some of my posts, and I realized myself, like so many other people on here go years and years back and have gone through tons of different meds. We think we finally have it right, then no. On to the next one. Then maybe a little mix of the two. 3 years later, we may be back to trying an old drug again....I've found on all my years on this site that we are constantly changing meds and searching for answers! That kinda sucks when you really think about it! There are very few people I think that find there med and are truly set for life....
Maybe I'm wrong, I don't mean this to be speaking for other people, just venting.
Posted by saturn on December 21, 2006, at 6:57:34
In reply to How difficult is RX research anyway?, posted by becksA on December 20, 2006, at 23:34:18
> I was searching some of my posts, and I realized myself, like so many other people on here go years and years back and have gone through tons of different meds. We think we finally have it right, then no. On to the next one. Then maybe a little mix of the two. 3 years later, we may be back to trying an old drug again....I've found on all my years on this site that we are constantly changing meds and searching for answers! That kinda sucks when you really think about it! There are very few people I think that find there med and are truly set for life....
>
> Maybe I'm wrong, I don't mean this to be speaking for other people, just venting.Perhaps even if one is able to get the right med(s), dosage, etc... that due to brain plasticity (or whatever) the effect tend to be a moving target, so to speak. Kind of like a song that you love, but if you listen to it too much it loses its spark. Just my 2c. Peace.
Posted by saturn on December 21, 2006, at 6:58:39
In reply to Re: How difficult is RX research anyway? » becksA, posted by saturn on December 21, 2006, at 6:57:34
Posted by tensor on December 21, 2006, at 10:59:28
In reply to How difficult is RX research anyway?, posted by becksA on December 20, 2006, at 23:34:18
>Maybe I'm wrong, I don't mean this to be speaking for other people, just venting.
No you're right. My aim is no longer finding a treatment that will last for decades. It's now to stay in remission as long as possible and to keep the relapses as short as possible. I can't really be away ill from my job six months every time I have a relapse, not sure how to fix it though. I wonder if T3 could boost the actions of the meds when they start to fail.
/Mattias
Posted by kelv on December 22, 2006, at 2:01:21
In reply to How difficult is RX research anyway?, posted by becksA on December 20, 2006, at 23:34:18
> I was searching some of my posts, and I realized myself, like so many other people on here go years and years back and have gone through tons of different meds. We think we finally have it right, then no. On to the next one. Then maybe a little mix of the two. 3 years later, we may be back to trying an old drug again....I've found on all my years on this site that we are constantly changing meds and searching for answers! That kinda sucks when you really think about it! There are very few people I think that find there med and are truly set for life....
>
> Maybe I'm wrong, I don't mean this to be speaking for other people, just venting.
I think MANY identify with you here.I wish i had a simple, plain, put down on paper neurological disorder instead of (psychiatric):(. There are folks who take/stay on the same med for decades. I know of a Narcoleptic (Neurological) fellow in his 60's who has been on the same medication for over 40 years, and has been working since he's 18.
Bit i guess you don't get to pick you disorder.
Posted by jimmygold70 on December 22, 2006, at 3:57:24
In reply to How difficult is RX research anyway?, posted by becksA on December 20, 2006, at 23:34:18
I agree. And it becomes obsessive. I made about 5 psychiatrist giving up from my frequent changes. The real trick is to know the limits of medications. That worst thing is that both you and your Doc have very little insight of real or imagined improvement.
My solutions is two-headed:
1. Get a dairy. I find it very hard to keep but I try.
2. Use a computerized CPT (continuous performance test). I worte one and I might share it in the future with all people here. I find it as the best objective measure of your functioning.For example, I felt that my concentration sucks over the last couple of weeks. I did the CPT and the response times were good and the variance (which is very important) was OK. So I figured out it was probably anxiety distracting me all the way. Took Klonopin and this was fixed!
Jimmyt
> I was searching some of my posts, and I realized myself, like so many other people on here go years and years back and have gone through tons of different meds. We think we finally have it right, then no. On to the next one. Then maybe a little mix of the two. 3 years later, we may be back to trying an old drug again....I've found on all my years on this site that we are constantly changing meds and searching for answers! That kinda sucks when you really think about it! There are very few people I think that find there med and are truly set for life....
>
> Maybe I'm wrong, I don't mean this to be speaking for other people, just venting.
Posted by jimmygold70 on December 22, 2006, at 3:59:42
In reply to Re: How difficult is RX research anyway? » becksA, posted by tensor on December 21, 2006, at 10:59:28
Why do you think T3 is the answer?
I mean, it might be a good augmentation strategy for treatment-resistant depression. But so is ECT!> >Maybe I'm wrong, I don't mean this to be speaking for other people, just venting.
>
> No you're right. My aim is no longer finding a treatment that will last for decades. It's now to stay in remission as long as possible and to keep the relapses as short as possible. I can't really be away ill from my job six months every time I have a relapse, not sure how to fix it though. I wonder if T3 could boost the actions of the meds when they start to fail.
>
> /Mattias
Posted by tensor on December 22, 2006, at 7:09:42
In reply to Re: How difficult is RX research anyway?, posted by jimmygold70 on December 22, 2006, at 3:59:42
>Why do you think T3 is the answer?
I don't. And I'm not looking for the 'answer', I'm just hoping it could boost ADs if needed.
>good augmentation strategy for treatment-resistant depression. But so is ECT!
It may be an effective treatment, but good? No.
/Mattias
Posted by yxibow on December 24, 2006, at 4:22:16
In reply to Re: How difficult is RX research anyway? » becksA, posted by kelv on December 22, 2006, at 2:01:21
> > I was searching some of my posts, and I realized myself, like so many other people on here go years and years back and have gone through tons of different meds. We think we finally have it right, then no. On to the next one. Then maybe a little mix of the two. 3 years later, we may be back to trying an old drug again....I've found on all my years on this site that we are constantly changing meds and searching for answers! That kinda sucks when you really think about it! There are very few people I think that find there med and are truly set for life....
> >
> > Maybe I'm wrong, I don't mean this to be speaking for other people, just venting.
>
>
> I think MANY identify with you here.
>
> I wish i had a simple, plain, put down on paper neurological disorder instead of (psychiatric):(. There are folks who take/stay on the same med for decades. I know of a Narcoleptic (Neurological) fellow in his 60's who has been on the same medication for over 40 years, and has been working since he's 18.
>
> Bit i guess you don't get to pick you disorder.
No -- you don't get to pick in life what genetics and biochemistry may bring you. I didn't pick to have now 5 years of Somatiform NOS and aggravating visual symptoms of an inability to filter out distracting things.
Narcolepsy is no picnic -- glad your narcoleptic friend had that many years of relatively trouble free existence, but its a disorder that can basically render you unable to drive or have restrictive items on your drivers license.
Only your psychiatrist and yourself have privilege with the exception that they have to report a) potential abuse of a minor, b) potential abuse of an elder, c) a true belief that your psychosis or otherwise specified disorder will make you kill the president or someone else and possibly d) that you will actually commit suicide.
Otherwise it is an ethical issue what they can tell your state's department of motor vehicles and you can countersue on such breaches. Even if god forbid you tell your psychologist/psychiatrist that you already killed someone or already harmed someone, they cannot break the confidence.
This is different with neurological disorders, which the doctor is faced with having to cut driving privileges and other such things outside of the boundaries of doctor-patient relationship, appointing conservatorship, etc.
Relish that it does exist because neurological disorders and hormonal-neurological disorders such as Addisons (If Kennedy survived he probably would have succumbed) and MS are fatal to nearly fatal conditions, well beyond the fatality of depressive and suicidal leaning disorders.
One of the comments was actually a good description of biochemical disorders such as OCD and Major Depression -- they are moving targets.Throughout life, things will change, sometimes for the better, sometimes not, and thus create the unfortunate need for medicine and therapy changes over life.
-- to more pleasant states of health and tidings for the holidays
Jay
Posted by kelv on January 6, 2007, at 0:02:56
In reply to Re: How difficult is RX research anyway? » kelv, posted by yxibow on December 24, 2006, at 4:22:16
> > I think MANY identify with you here.
> >
> > I wish i had a simple, plain, put down on paper neurological disorder instead of (psychiatric):(. There are folks who take/stay on the same med for decades. I know of a Narcoleptic (Neurological) fellow in his 60's who has been on the same medication for over 40 years, and has been working since he's 18.
Yes dep/anx/ocd/thought/perceptual disorders move along a spectrum of suicidality-manic psychosis, thought disorders from normality to believing one is God.But how nice it would be to have a single, mono-treatable condition?-alas we don't choose our disease.
BTW-my Narcoleptic aquantaince has taken highest (~60-80mgs) doses of medically supervised, monitored, scripted Methamphetamine tabs(currently 16!! Desoxyn 5mg IR daily) for~45 years!!, since the late 50's i believe, and is not a burnt out 'speed freak', nor amazingly does he suffer any depression when he doesn't take his powerfull stimulant medicine, HE JUST SLEEPS ALOT!.-seems so simple to me, one disorder one treatment.
Posted by yxibow on January 6, 2007, at 2:16:16
In reply to Re: How difficult is RX research anyway? » yxibow, posted by kelv on January 6, 2007, at 0:02:56
> > > I think MANY identify with you here.
> > >
> > > I wish i had a simple, plain, put down on paper neurological disorder instead of (psychiatric):(. There are folks who take/stay on the same med for decades. I know of a Narcoleptic (Neurological) fellow in his 60's who has been on the same medication for over 40 years, and has been working since he's 18.
>
>
> Yes dep/anx/ocd/thought/perceptual disorders move along a spectrum of suicidality-manic psychosis, thought disorders from normality to believing one is God.
>
> But how nice it would be to have a single, mono-treatable condition?-alas we don't choose our disease.
>
> BTW-my Narcoleptic aquantaince has taken highest (~60-80mgs) doses of medically supervised, monitored, scripted Methamphetamine tabs(currently 16!! Desoxyn 5mg IR daily) for~45 years!!, since the late 50's i believe, and is not a burnt out 'speed freak', nor amazingly does he suffer any depression when he doesn't take his powerfull stimulant medicine, HE JUST SLEEPS ALOT!.-seems so simple to me, one disorder one treatment.
Didn't say that there aren't "cures" for people. Still, I do hate to say it but at any time, if he drops his 80mg of prescribed d-amphetamine, and he sleeps at an inconvenient time, like say crossing the street, its curtains. Why would you wish such a disorder on yourself ?I know of an individual who has MS now for 20 years -- a remissive kind, fortunately, but it is a fatal condition -- yes, it is a single condition, but there are only the beginnings of palleative medication for such a disorder.
Would you want, no matter if you're as smart as Steven Hawking, a degenerative disorder, even if you can "fix" it with an eye operated voicebox and a wheelchair ?
Okay, how about more "benign" conditions like Type I diabetes, prone among Hispanic and Pacific Island populations? Sure, you can take insulin. Monitor your blood sugar level with modern equipment from the pharmacy. What if you forget any of those on the way to somewhere else? Fainting spells and pulling over to the side of the road or getting off the train at best, if you can catch it in time and dial 911 or 112 if you even have that in your area and hope that the medics get to you.
I just can't see the argument of wishing something that you think is simple on yourself. On review, in may not be that so.
I don't wish my disorder on anyone else and I don't wish depression on anybody else, but we don't get to choose what we ail, if anything, from in life. Nobody is born perfect. We are lucky, if our parents, as stewards, if you wish to believe this argument, have done amniocentesis, commonly around the 70s, and have aborted what would have been us if we had severe retardation, phenylketonuria, haemophilia, and other chromosomal abnormalities.
Or maybe you don't believe in abortion -- that is your choice. If you want to bring a baby into the world who is severely handicapped to the point of round the clock care and could possibly die at any moment because of a preventable screening.
Yes, it is hard on the family, especially the mother to decide to end the pregnancy, but this may be for the political board, but why bring pain and agony into what is an inexplicable creation by itself, a human being, in the world. A person who can function with redundant organs and complicated neurotransmitter systems.
Do I believe that one should abort just because we discovered a way of detecting depression? I don't know -- that's up to the ethicists -- I probably would have more difficulty saying that or a number of other conditions that are not intrinsically fatal, extremely severely life limiting, or socially unworkable. Because no matter how hard or difficult it may be, there is some self-functionality that is possible.
There's no magic pill. Yes, its a hodgepodge of medications and therapy and wherever you may live, the healthcare system is probably broken -- broken for your friend too if they live in the US I can make any scenario about it. But if you want to wish a single pill-cure disorder on yourself, go ahead and get out the genie. Just remember, you only get one wish. We have a life cycle on this earth, and there's no predicting things. In the western world, we stand a high chance in this century of living to ages that only the most fortunate did in the past two millennia with unpredictable disorders. If you're a male, you will certainly have a 50% chance of some prostate disorder past the age of 60 or 70. Breast cancer, HIV, diseases of developing countries. I needn't go on, to say, there are no one pill cures for those. But there's hope.
And there's hope for depression too. Hope comes from within as well as from outside.
-- tidings
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.