![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 23 to 47 of 47. Go back in thread:
Posted by Phillipa on April 22, 2012, at 20:36:09
In reply to Re: Psychiatric drug induced Chronic Brain Impairment, posted by bleauberry on April 22, 2012, at 9:00:30
Blue to me an analogy is thyroid meds, and insulin. And some I know in real life are doing great on meds and don't give them a second thought Phillipa
Posted by Willful on April 22, 2012, at 22:56:36
In reply to Lou's reply-nonopstardyv? » Willful, posted by Lou Pilder on April 21, 2012, at 19:35:44
If you are unsure of what I was meaning, Lou, let me clarify:
I was meaning:
1. tardive dyskinesia is a movement disorder rarely seen except if someone has been treated, usually for a relatively long time (hence the inclusion of the word "tardive"), with anti-psychotic drugs.2.. drugs that are anti-depressants are those drugs that are given to treat depression, hence their name.
3. a elavil is generally no longer given, but was I believe, considered an anti-depressant
b prozac is considered an anti-depressant (AD)
c. zoloft is considered an AD
d.. lithium is not considered an AD
e. nardil is considered an AD
f. imipramine is also not frequently prescribed but is also considered an AD4. the above named drugs, which I said were considered anti-depressant drugs, have not been thought or shown to lead to tardive dyskinesia.
5. Other drugs not named here but also considered ADs have also not been found to cause tardive dyskinesia.5. to clarify further:
I do not believe that ADs are thought to cause tardive dyskinesia.
Moreover, to answer your other question:
1. I know some facts about the chemical composition and constituents of the above-named drugs. I am not an expert and do not have deep knowledge about it.
2. One does not need to know the chemical composition or consituents of a drug to know whether it causes tardive dyskinesia.
3. One can determine if a drug causes tardive dyskinesia by doing an epidemiological analysis of the occurrence of tardive dyskinesia. Hence it is more useful to know the results of such analyses than to know the chemical composition of the drug.k if one wants to know whether tardive dyskinesia is caused by the drug.
4. this has been done and the results show that ADs do not cause TD, as stated above.
I hope this helps to you understand what I was meaning.
Willful
Posted by SLS on April 23, 2012, at 6:29:36
In reply to Re: Psychiatric drug induced CBI Intro, posted by huxley on April 21, 2012, at 19:24:38
Hi Huxley.
In what ways should we act upon the conclusions of Dr. Peter Breggin?
I hope things are still going well with you.
- Scott
Posted by zazenducke on April 23, 2012, at 9:31:58
In reply to Re: Psychiatric drug induced Chronic Brain Impairment, posted by Willful on April 21, 2012, at 11:43:09
> One reason Breggin is a bit of a flashpoint for me is that I was influenced by his book (among other things) to refuse to take ADs for a very long time, but I have found them to have made a huge change in my life.
And others have read his books and come off the drugs and it has made a huge change in their lives for the better.
>
> Are they perfect? no. I do notice some lessening of my ability to focus and to work-- but my life was really unliveable before while now i can feel hopeful and able to breathe a little.It's good that you are able to recognize the side effects and make an informed choice. I think one of the worse side effects is apathy which keeps people from even realizing how much they have lost.
>
> I never was particularly convinced by many of his arguments, but some of his sense that drugs will destroy your individuality and all that-- that they are more like poison than treatments-- held a lot of influence and made me even more intransigent than I would otherwise have been. I don't say that I'm not stubborn enough on my own-- but I do think he can rigidify people in their fear and aversion even to ~~trying~~ these drugs-- which I think is unfortunately harmful to many, even though it does protect some.True but there are many books which promote psychiatric drugs not to mention the advertising of the pharmaceutical companies.
>
> This book of his specifically addressed ADs--not antipsychotics, which I think are an entirely different issue.
>
> In fact what you say, Zazen would specifically discourage people from even a trial of drugs-- and this is what most concerns me. I'm sure that these drugs don't help some people -- although I think combinations can help more people than individual drugs. But the merrygoround of trying one and trying another can be incredibly depressing and harmful on it own-- so I don't see the current situation as a panacea.
>
> But I fear that telling people that even a Short Trial will give them brain damage is just such an extreme position-- and the concept of brain damage is such a subjective one in your metric-- based on some sort of self-observation, by people who are self-admittedly depressed-- and therefore prone to think the worst-- has the very very destructive possible result that people just won't take even the risk of trying an AD out-- for fear of irreversible damage. Damage for which there is absolutely no evidence.
there is evidence even if much of it is anecdotal. The whole diagnosis and evaluation of ADs usefulness is also subjective being anecdotes translated into checklists.
>
> If there is evidence, I'm just as open as anyone to knowing what it is-- I mean real evidence-- not studies where an unrevealed number of rats are force fed high-fat diet-- there are as we know all sorts of problems with even identifying depression in rats-- much less stressing them, giving them ADs (what dose? by the way), force feeding them fats, and then drawing conclusions.The study about the rotund rats I posted above was something I ran across online. I'm not aware of it being used by Breggin. Depression cannot be identified in humans either except by description of symptoms.
>
> But if there is evidence, I just as much as anyone would want to protect people from damage. I just don't think there is any --about ADs-- that can be cited. There are side effects-- and people can stop the drug. But on your argument, people shouldn't even start the drug at all-- because there's no return.
>
> That just isn't right.I think people should be informed and count the cost before they start. And that guidelines for CBI should be established so that people can be taken off the drugs as soon as it becomes apparent.
Posted by zazenducke on April 23, 2012, at 9:35:34
In reply to Re: Psychiatric drug induced Chronic Brain Impairment, posted by LostBoyinNCReturns on April 21, 2012, at 11:51:53
> Breggin lacks credibility as a psychiatrist. I watched an interview of him on if I remember correctly, Sixty Minutes. This was six or seven years back I think. They mentioned he has no hospital privilges anywhere, none will give him any.
>
Considering the state of modern psychiatry I don't really think disapproval by his peers is a negative.
Posted by zazenducke on April 23, 2012, at 9:48:39
In reply to Re: Psychiatric drug induced CBI Intro, posted by huxley on April 22, 2012, at 6:16:59
O yes they're trying to put little burkhas on our brains.
scary times these
Posted by zazenducke on April 23, 2012, at 10:02:28
In reply to Re: Lou's request-ahbpsolu, posted by Willful on April 21, 2012, at 16:38:59
> Lou,
>
>
> Anti-depressants don't cause tardive dyskinesia.
>
> I also don't think that generally anti-psychotic drugs when given in very small doses as adjuncts to anti-depressants therapy cause tardive dyskinesia. If and when it is shown that they do in any appreciable numbers, then that will be a matter of concern.
>
> WillfulGlenmullen described tardive dyskinesia and parkinsonian like symptoms from Prozac.
Posted by zazenducke on April 23, 2012, at 11:51:35
In reply to Re: Lou's request-ahbpsolu » Willful, posted by zazenducke on April 23, 2012, at 10:02:28
Nervous system
Nervous system side effects including headache, anxiety, nervousness, insomnia, drowsiness, sedation, tremor, dizziness, jitteriness, and fatigue have all been reported. The reported incidence of each of these effects ranges between 4% and 20% of treated patients. Cases of akathisia, neuromuscular twitching, tics, myoclonus, migraines, sleep abnormalities, dyskinesia, acute dystonic reactions, worsening of Parkinson's disease, seizures, stuttering, paresthesias, and cognitive dysfunction have also been reported. Balance disorder and bruxism have also been reported. Postmarketing experience has included memory impairment.
Cases of the neuroleptic malignant syndrome occurring in patients started on fluoxetine have been reported.
Posted by Willful on April 23, 2012, at 12:17:04
In reply to Re: Lou's request-ahbpsolu » Willful, posted by zazenducke on April 23, 2012, at 10:02:28
I sympathize with an informed and reasoned position about the limits of ADs-- and other drugs. But I do question the ability of people to accurately access certain aspects of use of ADs, and think that myths and exaggerated fears do harm in negatively influencing people who most need the drugs.
I question a lot of AD use, because they just aren't better than placebo for mildly and even moderately depressed people. They may be of use to some of them, but they certainly may not. Other treatments seem to be as or more effective. In that respect, while I don't think on the whole, they cause the sort of brain damage that some people here are implying, I do think they are greatly over-prescribed in an irresponsible or at least unreflective way.
But anyway, the small point I wanted to make here was that there are very isolated reports of EPS in the people who use ADs. However, this doesn't add up to EPS being anything but a rare reaction. Moreover it is't clear how much the specific combination of these drugs with prior or concurrent drugs causes the effect. It has certainly been strongly stated here that CBI is much more than a rare occurrence.
Again, I do'nt object to reasoned debate about the value of ADs. In fact I think it' s necessary.
What I do deeply object to is the claims I read of horrible and so pervasive and irreversible effects that anyone who even contemplates an AD must be out of their mind.
I'm not saying you're in the latter camp, but people who take that position and try to terrify people out of considering ADs are truly causing harm.
Willful
Posted by poser938 on April 24, 2012, at 11:43:32
In reply to Psychiatric drug induced Chronic Brain Impairment, posted by zazenducke on April 20, 2012, at 11:13:25
well my brain has been chronically impaired by psychiatric meds. i was reading a book by him called "Toxic Psychiatry" a few months ago and many of the things mentioned in the book i have either experienced myself or read about someone experiencing it.
now, i do understand that these meds can and have helped many people. but they have also hurt many people. and some of these people have been harmed permenently. whether through permanent effects from the med or by suicide. and how many years did it take from the time antidepressants first came on the market to the when they finally got the warning for increased suicidal thoughts? around 50 years! it would be foolish to think they didnt fully know about this until around 2004. i'm positive they knew about it back in the 60's.
what im trying to say is, they need to be up front about everything these meds can do to a person. i have been made to feel hopeless because when i bring up my permanent effects that some psychiatric meds have had on me.. doctors look at me like im an idiot. and they they start telling me im wrong. and then they tell me im delusional for thinking this.
i know i have an atypical type of brain, but i am sick and tired of doctors making me feel ashamed of my dysfunctional brain and how it got this way.
Posted by Willful on April 24, 2012, at 12:04:07
In reply to Re: Psychiatric drug induced Chronic Brain Impairment, posted by poser938 on April 24, 2012, at 11:43:32
Actually, feeling ashamed of something is a complicated state-- I don't think it's the doctors who are making you feel ashamed or causing you to feel hopeless or so self-doubting that you don't know what to think at moments.
These feelings can be evoked by doctors-- I"ve had those reactions too. But it's clear to me in myself that these come from me and my sense of myself-- not from the doctors. Their attitude may play into my sense of being no good, or wrong-- but it doesnt' create it, or even compel it in the moment.
I guess it's hard not to feel compelled, but it still is a choice we make in ourselves-- unless someone is truly compelling you to do something, which is a whole other story.
Willful
Posted by poser938 on April 24, 2012, at 13:05:07
In reply to Re: Psychiatric drug induced Chronic Brain Impairment, posted by Willful on April 24, 2012, at 12:04:07
i agree with what youre saying.
i know a quote that goes something like... "when there are no enemies within, the enemies outside cannot hurt you"
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 24, 2012, at 19:42:52
In reply to Psychiatric drug induced Chronic Brain Impairment, posted by zazenducke on April 20, 2012, at 11:13:25
> http://breggin.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=27&Itemid=37
>
> Why isn't there an official diagnosis like this?
>
> It would save people from being diagnosed with some mental illness and then being given even more of the drugs that are causing it? Most psychiatrists are not interested in this and of course Big Pharm just keeps pushing yet more drugs to "treat" the symptoms of the drugs you're all ready on. And the shrinks helpfully provide more diagnoses and emerging syndromes to justify more drugging.
>
> This article points out that the effects of CBI is really no different whether it is coming from a concussion, street drugs, traumatic brain injury from combat etc.
>
> He discusses treatment and the possibility of recovery which is somewhat hopeful.I remember last century mentioning Breggin on babble led to scorn and dismissal but he has been shown to be right more and more as time goes by.
>
>Friends,
If you are cnsidering being a discussant in this thread, and have any doubts about the credibility of Dr Peter R. Breggin, I am requesting that you view the following video.
Dr Breggin revealed what some posters here already know about the issue of if SSRI drugs could cause suicide.
My friends, it is generally accepted that 42,000 people died last year from psychotropic drugs as being from one way or another, and that going forward, think of how many of people could die from these drugs.
Now if a manufacturer of one of these drugs hid the truth about suicide, then could they be hiding something else?
You see, I know where the chemical constintuants that make up these drugs, where they came from and what they were used for. And I know that the some of the popular drugs that are now on the market are really just new names for knock-offs of old drugs that wre used (redacted by respondent).
Lou
To see Dr Bregggin testify in front of congress about some of these drugs:
A. Pull up Gooogle
B. Type in:
[youtube,Peter R. Breggin, MD-Antidepressants & suicide-Congressional Testimony]
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 24, 2012, at 20:07:46
In reply to Re: Lou's reply, posted by Willful on April 22, 2012, at 22:56:36
> If you are unsure of what I was meaning, Lou, let me clarify:
>
> I was meaning:
> 1. tardive dyskinesia is a movement disorder rarely seen except if someone has been treated, usually for a relatively long time (hence the inclusion of the word "tardive"), with anti-psychotic drugs.
>
> 2.. drugs that are anti-depressants are those drugs that are given to treat depression, hence their name.
>
> 3. a elavil is generally no longer given, but was I believe, considered an anti-depressant
> b prozac is considered an anti-depressant (AD)
> c. zoloft is considered an AD
> d.. lithium is not considered an AD
> e. nardil is considered an AD
> f. imipramine is also not frequently prescribed but is also considered an AD
>
> 4. the above named drugs, which I said were considered anti-depressant drugs, have not been thought or shown to lead to tardive dyskinesia.
> 5. Other drugs not named here but also considered ADs have also not been found to cause tardive dyskinesia.
>
> 5. to clarify further:
>
> I do not believe that ADs are thought to cause tardive dyskinesia.
>
> Moreover, to answer your other question:
>
> 1. I know some facts about the chemical composition and constituents of the above-named drugs. I am not an expert and do not have deep knowledge about it.
>
> 2. One does not need to know the chemical composition or consituents of a drug to know whether it causes tardive dyskinesia.
>
> 3. One can determine if a drug causes tardive dyskinesia by doing an epidemiological analysis of the occurrence of tardive dyskinesia. Hence it is more useful to know the results of such analyses than to know the chemical composition of the drug.k if one wants to know whether tardive dyskinesia is caused by the drug.
>
> 4. this has been done and the results show that ADs do not cause TD, as stated above.
>
>
>
> I hope this helps to you understand what I was meaning.
>
> Willful
>
> Willful,
You wrote,[...the results show that Ads do not cause TD, as stated above...I hope you understand...].
I understand very clearly that Ades can cause tardive dyskinesia, so I do not understand what you are wanting me to understand. If you could post as to what you want me too understnd after you look at the following links, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly. They aree in my understanding classified as Ads and if not, which ones are not?
Louhttp://www.ehealthme.com/ds/effexor/tardive+dyskinesia
http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/paxil/tardive+dyskinesia
http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/zyprexa/tardive+dyskinesia
http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/celexa/tardive+dyskinesia
http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/luvox/tardive+dyskinesia
http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/lexapro/tardive+dyskinesia
http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/anafranil/tardive+dyskinesia
http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/cymbalta/tardive+dyskinesia
http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/wellbutrin/tardive+dyskinesia
http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/trazadone/tardive+dyskinesia
Posted by Willful on April 25, 2012, at 3:13:08
In reply to Lou's reply-juzwuddaewmeen » Willful, posted by Lou Pilder on April 24, 2012, at 20:07:46
Based on the reports on the ehealthme website, to which you referred me:
of the over 38,000 people who, over the entire time that effexor has been used, have REPORTED A SIDE EFFECT only about 190 have reported any sort of tardive dyskinesia.It goes without saying that not all people who take a drug experience side effects; and not all people who experience side effects report these side effects.
I would conclude therefore, that the percentage of people who have actually taken effexor and have experienced tardive dyskinesia is far far below the percentage cites on this website, which is 190/38000+ (or 0.49%).
If the number is , as if would logical have to be, greatly less that 0.49% and significantly lower than 190/38,000., I think we have an insignifiant, if not infinitesmal percentage of people who experience this side effec.t.
The numbes for paxil are even more favorable --.24% or 141/58,000.
Again, I remind you this is out of a small subset of those who take paxil-- the subset of those who not only had a side-effect, but whose side effect was bothersome enough or who were savvy enough to report a side effect to a health practitioner.
A side note is that it is not clear how reliable these numbers are, since the vetting of numbers on this website seems to be lax-- or very hard to locate. It seems to be based entirely on health care professionals who are PAID for reporting a side effect.
I just don't find the website entirely credible. Moreover, the numbers themselves suggest that TD is not meaningfully associated with paxil or effexor.
I hope you find this extremely reassuring.
Posted by huxley on April 25, 2012, at 3:51:06
In reply to Re: Psychiatric drug induced CBI Intro » huxley, posted by SLS on April 23, 2012, at 6:29:36
> Hi Huxley.
>
> In what ways should we act upon the conclusions of Dr. Peter Breggin?
>
> I hope things are still going well with you.
>
>
> - Scott
Im good thanks scott.I believe doctors should stop medicating people at the drop of a hat with medications that cause terrible damage.
I don't know how you or others who are already well down the medication path should respond, that is your own mess to unwind or if you so choose to persist with.
I personally discontinued my treatment to great effect, like thousands of others.
I say these things because of how much difference it has made to my life, not just for the sake of arguing.
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 25, 2012, at 19:55:15
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-- what I mean, posted by Willful on April 25, 2012, at 3:13:08
> Based on the reports on the ehealthme website, to which you referred me:
>
>
> of the over 38,000 people who, over the entire time that effexor has been used, have REPORTED A SIDE EFFECT only about 190 have reported any sort of tardive dyskinesia.
>
> It goes without saying that not all people who take a drug experience side effects; and not all people who experience side effects report these side effects.
>
> I would conclude therefore, that the percentage of people who have actually taken effexor and have experienced tardive dyskinesia is far far below the percentage cites on this website, which is 190/38000+ (or 0.49%).
>
> If the number is , as if would logical have to be, greatly less that 0.49% and significantly lower than 190/38,000., I think we have an insignifiant, if not infinitesmal percentage of people who experience this side effec.t.
>
> The numbes for paxil are even more favorable --.24% or 141/58,000.
>
> Again, I remind you this is out of a small subset of those who take paxil-- the subset of those who not only had a side-effect, but whose side effect was bothersome enough or who were savvy enough to report a side effect to a health practitioner.
>
> A side note is that it is not clear how reliable these numbers are, since the vetting of numbers on this website seems to be lax-- or very hard to locate. It seems to be based entirely on health care professionals who are PAID for reporting a side effect.
>
> I just don't find the website entirely credible. Moreover, the numbers themselves suggest that TD is not meaningfully associated with paxil or effexor.
>
> I hope you find this extremely reassuring.
>
> Friends,
If you are considering being a discussant in this thread, I am requesting that you click on the following link.
Lou
http://www.ehealthme.com/
Posted by zazenducke on April 26, 2012, at 7:04:45
In reply to Re: Lou's request-ahbpsolu, posted by Willful on April 21, 2012, at 16:38:59
In general, neuronal dematuration and damage are likely to interfere with proper brain functioning (Jackson, 2008, 2009). The Parkinsonian-like morphological characteristics caused by antidepressants could explain why antidepressants can induce tardive dyskinesia (involuntary, repetitive body movements; El-Mallakh et al., 2011).
http://www.frontiersin.org/Evolutionary_Psychology/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00117/fullEven if only a few people developed TD, the brain damage which eventually causes the TD is taking place in anyone that takes the drug. It's the end result of a process and the process itself is damaging long before it manifests itself in TD.
>
> Anti-depressants don't cause tardive dyskinesia.
>
> I also don't think that generally anti-psychotic drugs when given in very small doses as adjuncts to anti-depressants therapy cause tardive dyskinesia. If and when it is shown that they do in any appreciable numbers, then that will be a matter of concern.
>
> Willful
Posted by Willful on April 26, 2012, at 11:57:10
In reply to Re: Lou's request-ahbpsolu » Willful, posted by zazenducke on April 26, 2012, at 7:04:45
There's no evidence, though, that neuronal dematuration or damage is the end result of a process that takes place in everyone. There are lots of physical reactions that take place rarely, in a few individuals, because individual physiology is different and those people's bodies' have an inability, as an example, to process certain substances. It's not as if if one person has a condition, everyone has a lesser degree of that condition, but force of logic. People are sufficiently different that biological process are not uniform through the species.
So I think your claim isn't based on genuine logic, or on any established fact, but is based in fear. I'm very sorry if you've had a bad reaction to medications; more care should be taken to monitor how people are responding and to give assistance and support. Any responsible doctor will do this. But doctors are overworked and often in the dark themselves, as you point out. They're trying to help-- but they get caught in their own systems, and prior experiences.
All too often left to people to monitor and to evaluate their own reactions-- which is partly inevitable. But doctors may be insufficiently open or able to listen. We;ll experienced doctors who are inhumane, brusque, or uninformed-- when we're at our most vulnerable. It's the system of health care more than doctors, often.
But that's not because all ADs cause deterioration of cells--in the human body-- or are toxic in some way.
I do think we need more research on how to mitigate the effects of drugs, how to predict usefulness of drugs to individuals, and many other things. But we can all agree that resources are limited, knowledge about the brain is at its beginning, and doctors and patients alike are trapped in the time that they live in, with the treatments that are available. I doubt doctors who operated before the advent of anesthetics wanted to do so-- and I doubt that doctors are happy about the failure of drugs to help their patients. But they muddle on like the rest of us-- hoping that they can help many, and disappointed or worse when they aren't able to help.
They don't necessarily tell us =-- and we aren't necessarily the best judge of how they see us, or what their motives are.
I think however, that myths, fantasies and both hopeful and despairing projections blanket this field of psychoactive drugs on both the positive and negative sides. We infer from our own experiences, just as doctors do. At least let's admit that we know less than they do-- And let's not assume that what happens in a test tube happens in the body, or that how a mouse may (or may not) be reacting will happen in humans. If you've had TD from an AD, or know someone who has, from all I've read you are in a very very tiny minority. And I am extremely sorry that this has happened. Of course if it happened frequently, I would be just as vehement in saying that they shouldn't be used except when absolutely necessary-- and then only vigilantly.
Also I should add that the cases of TD reported on the ehealthme site, were all categorized as in the least severe category. I'm not saying therefore that TD is acceptable in any category-- but that you have to weight risks and benefits in any sphere, and it seems to me that the possible benefits from ADs for severely depressed people far outweight the risks of trials of various AD drugs.
If you're against even trying ADs in cases of serious depression, I , like Scott, would like to know what you propose to do to alleviate the suffering of people.
Despair poisons lives. And imo, anything that offers to give people a chance at a liveable and productive life, less it's as bad or almost as bad as the disease, is worth a try-- So far as I see, ADs are well within that category. Anyone who wants them banned or who frightens people away from them is doing them a disservice. And that makes me very sad and very worried for those people.
Willful
Posted by sigismund on April 26, 2012, at 14:03:00
In reply to Re: Lou's request-ahbpsolu, posted by Willful on April 26, 2012, at 11:57:10
I tried to find Theodore Dalrymple's essay in which he says 'Despair may be a valid philosophical position' but could not.
>Despair poisons lives.
It might. You wouldn't wish it on anyone. But it can enlarge and humanise lives; I have seen this.
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 26, 2012, at 16:18:28
In reply to Re: Lou's request-ahbpsolu, posted by Willful on April 26, 2012, at 11:57:10
> There's no evidence, though, that neuronal dematuration or damage is the end result of a process that takes place in everyone. There are lots of physical reactions that take place rarely, in a few individuals, because individual physiology is different and those people's bodies' have an inability, as an example, to process certain substances. It's not as if if one person has a condition, everyone has a lesser degree of that condition, but force of logic. People are sufficiently different that biological process are not uniform through the species.
>
> So I think your claim isn't based on genuine logic, or on any established fact, but is based in fear. I'm very sorry if you've had a bad reaction to medications; more care should be taken to monitor how people are responding and to give assistance and support. Any responsible doctor will do this. But doctors are overworked and often in the dark themselves, as you point out. They're trying to help-- but they get caught in their own systems, and prior experiences.
>
> All too often left to people to monitor and to evaluate their own reactions-- which is partly inevitable. But doctors may be insufficiently open or able to listen. We;ll experienced doctors who are inhumane, brusque, or uninformed-- when we're at our most vulnerable. It's the system of health care more than doctors, often.
>
> But that's not because all ADs cause deterioration of cells--in the human body-- or are toxic in some way.
>
> I do think we need more research on how to mitigate the effects of drugs, how to predict usefulness of drugs to individuals, and many other things. But we can all agree that resources are limited, knowledge about the brain is at its beginning, and doctors and patients alike are trapped in the time that they live in, with the treatments that are available. I doubt doctors who operated before the advent of anesthetics wanted to do so-- and I doubt that doctors are happy about the failure of drugs to help their patients. But they muddle on like the rest of us-- hoping that they can help many, and disappointed or worse when they aren't able to help.
>
> They don't necessarily tell us =-- and we aren't necessarily the best judge of how they see us, or what their motives are.
>
> I think however, that myths, fantasies and both hopeful and despairing projections blanket this field of psychoactive drugs on both the positive and negative sides. We infer from our own experiences, just as doctors do. At least let's admit that we know less than they do-- And let's not assume that what happens in a test tube happens in the body, or that how a mouse may (or may not) be reacting will happen in humans. If you've had TD from an AD, or know someone who has, from all I've read you are in a very very tiny minority. And I am extremely sorry that this has happened. Of course if it happened frequently, I would be just as vehement in saying that they shouldn't be used except when absolutely necessary-- and then only vigilantly.
>
> Also I should add that the cases of TD reported on the ehealthme site, were all categorized as in the least severe category. I'm not saying therefore that TD is acceptable in any category-- but that you have to weight risks and benefits in any sphere, and it seems to me that the possible benefits from ADs for severely depressed people far outweight the risks of trials of various AD drugs.
>
> If you're against even trying ADs in cases of serious depression, I , like Scott, would like to know what you propose to do to alleviate the suffering of people.
>
> Despair poisons lives. And imo, anything that offers to give people a chance at a liveable and productive life, less it's as bad or almost as bad as the disease, is worth a try-- So far as I see, ADs are well within that category. Anyone who wants them banned or who frightens people away from them is doing them a disservice. And that makes me very sad and very worried for those people.
>
> Willful
>
>
> Friends,
If you are considering being a discussant in this thread, I am requesting that you view the following video.
Lou
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIVxv5ag0pQ
>
Posted by Lou Pilder on April 26, 2012, at 16:32:20
In reply to Lou's request-knoeehvihdenz, posted by Lou Pilder on April 26, 2012, at 16:18:28
> > There's no evidence, though, that neuronal dematuration or damage is the end result of a process that takes place in everyone. There are lots of physical reactions that take place rarely, in a few individuals, because individual physiology is different and those people's bodies' have an inability, as an example, to process certain substances. It's not as if if one person has a condition, everyone has a lesser degree of that condition, but force of logic. People are sufficiently different that biological process are not uniform through the species.
> >
> > So I think your claim isn't based on genuine logic, or on any established fact, but is based in fear. I'm very sorry if you've had a bad reaction to medications; more care should be taken to monitor how people are responding and to give assistance and support. Any responsible doctor will do this. But doctors are overworked and often in the dark themselves, as you point out. They're trying to help-- but they get caught in their own systems, and prior experiences.
> >
> > All too often left to people to monitor and to evaluate their own reactions-- which is partly inevitable. But doctors may be insufficiently open or able to listen. We;ll experienced doctors who are inhumane, brusque, or uninformed-- when we're at our most vulnerable. It's the system of health care more than doctors, often.
> >
> > But that's not because all ADs cause deterioration of cells--in the human body-- or are toxic in some way.
> >
> > I do think we need more research on how to mitigate the effects of drugs, how to predict usefulness of drugs to individuals, and many other things. But we can all agree that resources are limited, knowledge about the brain is at its beginning, and doctors and patients alike are trapped in the time that they live in, with the treatments that are available. I doubt doctors who operated before the advent of anesthetics wanted to do so-- and I doubt that doctors are happy about the failure of drugs to help their patients. But they muddle on like the rest of us-- hoping that they can help many, and disappointed or worse when they aren't able to help.
> >
> > They don't necessarily tell us =-- and we aren't necessarily the best judge of how they see us, or what their motives are.
> >
> > I think however, that myths, fantasies and both hopeful and despairing projections blanket this field of psychoactive drugs on both the positive and negative sides. We infer from our own experiences, just as doctors do. At least let's admit that we know less than they do-- And let's not assume that what happens in a test tube happens in the body, or that how a mouse may (or may not) be reacting will happen in humans. If you've had TD from an AD, or know someone who has, from all I've read you are in a very very tiny minority. And I am extremely sorry that this has happened. Of course if it happened frequently, I would be just as vehement in saying that they shouldn't be used except when absolutely necessary-- and then only vigilantly.
> >
> > Also I should add that the cases of TD reported on the ehealthme site, were all categorized as in the least severe category. I'm not saying therefore that TD is acceptable in any category-- but that you have to weight risks and benefits in any sphere, and it seems to me that the possible benefits from ADs for severely depressed people far outweight the risks of trials of various AD drugs.
> >
> > If you're against even trying ADs in cases of serious depression, I , like Scott, would like to know what you propose to do to alleviate the suffering of people.
> >
> > Despair poisons lives. And imo, anything that offers to give people a chance at a liveable and productive life, less it's as bad or almost as bad as the disease, is worth a try-- So far as I see, ADs are well within that category. Anyone who wants them banned or who frightens people away from them is doing them a disservice. And that makes me very sad and very worried for those people.
> >
> > Willful
> >
> >
> > Friends,
> If you are considering being a discussant in this thread, I am requesting that you view the following video.
> Lou
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIVxv5ag0pQ
>
> > correction:
Lou
To see the video:
A. Pull up Google
B. Type in:
[youtube, Tardive Dyskinesia in young child after stopping Invega-Youtube]
>
>
Posted by JohnLA on April 26, 2012, at 23:34:36
In reply to Re: Lou's request-ahbpsolu, posted by sigismund on April 26, 2012, at 14:03:00
nicely put sigismund.
i forgot to thank you a few weeks ago about answering my ? to you about something you wrote. i can't seem to find the thread, but thanks!
i like very much how well read you are and how you have a way of expressing yourself. is the aussie school system that good? ;) i was a big reader before my depression hit. i actually just finished my first book in almost a year just this week. there we actual moments where i felt 'normal' as i read the book. no depression...
again i thank you and compliment you on your way with words.
john
Posted by sigismund on April 27, 2012, at 21:05:18
In reply to well put sigismund » sigismund, posted by JohnLA on April 26, 2012, at 23:34:36
Thank you for your kindness.
It could depend on the extent to which despair is the result of one's own actions and inclinations.
There are many people who should feel more despair.
Perhaps we only feel despair when we run out of options.
I'll be talking about Hitler and his medical treatment in a minute :)
Posted by AlexanderDenmark on April 30, 2012, at 5:23:33
In reply to Psychiatric drug induced Chronic Brain Impairment, posted by zazenducke on April 20, 2012, at 11:13:25
> http://breggin.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=27&Itemid=37
>
> Why isn't there an official diagnosis like this?
>
> It would save people from being diagnosed with some mental illness and then being given even more of the drugs that are causing it? Most psychiatrists are not interested in this and of course Big Pharm just keeps pushing yet more drugs to "treat" the symptoms of the drugs you're all ready on. And the shrinks helpfully provide more diagnoses and emerging syndromes to justify more drugging.
>
> This article points out that the effects of CBI is really no different whether it is coming from a concussion, street drugs, traumatic brain injury from combat etc.
>
> He discusses treatment and the possibility of recovery which is somewhat hopeful.I remember last century mentioning Breggin on babble led to scorn and dismissal but he has been shown to be right more and more as time goes by.
>
>What I have experience during AD treatment, and after is pretty much this.
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.