Psycho-Babble Medication Thread 1016713

Shown: posts 2 to 26 of 26. Go back in thread:

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. linkadge

Posted by SLS on April 29, 2012, at 19:59:02

In reply to Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now., posted by linkadge on April 29, 2012, at 19:35:57

I agree.

> Its 2012. We are still mainly using prozac, zoloft, celexa...SSRIs that we had over a decade ago.
>
> I don't think they work very well, but we don't have anything else.

What's scary is that pharmaceutical companies are not investing the resources in developing antidepressants the way they once did. Even Novartis (formally Sandoz) has cut back on their program. They were at one time the most progressive American pharmaceutical company in developing psychotropics. They came in second to France's Servier.

> Psychiatry seems to be a bit impotent right now.

Psychiatry has seemed impotent to me for as long as I have been treated by it - especially when you compare it to other fields of medicine. Man, I was p*ssed when I first learned that they didn't know everything.

> A lot of talk in the past decade, but really nothing new.

The 1990s was supposed to be the "decade of the brain." I bet those who proclaimed it as such now realize their naivety.

> Has psychiatry gone into a resession?

Yup.


- Scott

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now.

Posted by Phillipa on April 30, 2012, at 10:05:46

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. linkadge, posted by SLS on April 29, 2012, at 19:59:02

So does this mean they don't consider it an illness but a state of mind and that it's up to us to pull ourselves up by the bootstraps and carry on? Maybe this is why that new doc doesn't change or really prescribe meds. He says some do well on meds. That's it. Phillipa

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now.

Posted by Phillipa on April 30, 2012, at 10:10:23

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now., posted by Phillipa on April 30, 2012, at 10:05:46

Wait that explains why a high school friends husband who is a pdoc suggested I go to Duke as they deal in a lot of alternative stuff. He's an Addictions pdoc and his wife old friend said he uses lots of alternative supplements. Phillipa

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now.

Posted by ron1953 on April 30, 2012, at 10:50:17

In reply to Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now., posted by linkadge on April 29, 2012, at 19:35:57

Seems to me that psychiatry has really not made any real progress for a much longer than mentioned. Prozac, etc. didn't seem to genuinely live up to the hype and buzz they generated when introduced, but an amazing number of doctors (and not just psychiatrists but GPs as well) jumped on and stayed on the bandwagon. The marketing strategies (especially on TV) of Big Pharma have managed to keep use of the medications quite high, to the detriment of many.

I think it's naive to believe that the drug companies develop drugs for altruistic reasons. And remember that many drugs end up being marketed for conditions other than what they were developed for, due to observed side-effects that just happened to be potentially useful. Minoxidil (Rogaine) was developed and prescribed as a med for hypertension, but has a side-effect of hair growth. Seroquel and other anti-psychotics started getting used experimentally by practitioners for other conditions, like depression.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. ron1953

Posted by Alexei on April 30, 2012, at 12:25:10

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now., posted by ron1953 on April 30, 2012, at 10:50:17

> The marketing strategies (especially on TV) of Big Pharma have managed to keep use of the medications quite high, to the detriment of many.

Watching TV ATM ... I have seen Allegra, Claririn, abilify, nexium, & prilosec within the last two hours. Not to mention the incessant OTC rubbish.


> I think it's naive to believe that the drug companies develop drugs for altruistic reasons.

Haha ... I can only imagine what the pharma executives say behind closed doors. They're motivated to make $$$$, while jerking us around with their methods.

It seems mental health is lowest on the priority list.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now.

Posted by Phil on April 30, 2012, at 13:00:23

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. ron1953, posted by Alexei on April 30, 2012, at 12:25:10

Oh sh*t, y'all have stumbled on to the real truth, Big Pharma is unethical. Didn't know that.

I'll be leaving here soon because this was a place designed for people who need help with their meds. Instead it's pretty much a battleground.

They aren't here to hear anti-med stuff. Y'all didn't care for that crap when you used meds, did you?

This stuff is taking over here and people don't come here to hear a lot of angry people. If you have suggestions to help someone then do it.

It's like you dropped out of school but you still hang around bitching telling the kids still in school how f*cked it is. Well, they(we)know it's f*cked but it's where we're at. Right or wrong.

At this point, maybe anytime anyone asks a med question, just tell them directly, you don't need that crap. Doesn't work. Gave me brain damage. Glad you stopped by.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. Phil

Posted by ron1953 on April 30, 2012, at 13:20:00

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now., posted by Phil on April 30, 2012, at 13:00:23

Are you saying that discussions about no meds or fewer meds have no place here? Over-medication is a common but rarely reported phenomenon, and not just involving psychiatric meds.

You, too, can choose to ignore those posts that have no relavence to you. Or does one only seek advice one wants to hear? All of my shrinks told me what I wanted to hear, and prescribed meds in a similar fashion. It felt good, validating, empowering - and it was mostly wrong.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. ron1953

Posted by europerep on April 30, 2012, at 13:40:35

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now., posted by ron1953 on April 30, 2012, at 10:50:17

> The marketing strategies (especially on TV)

Well, that's not a problem of psychiatry. It's a problem of the USA. Direct-to-consumer advertising of pharmaceuticals is banned in basically every other country in the world, New Zealand being the only exception I know of.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now.

Posted by ron1953 on April 30, 2012, at 13:46:02

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. ron1953, posted by europerep on April 30, 2012, at 13:40:35

> > The marketing strategies (especially on TV)
>
> Well, that's not a problem of psychiatry. It's a problem of the USA. Direct-to-consumer advertising of pharmaceuticals is banned in basically every other country in the world, New Zealand being the only exception I know of.
-------------------------------------------
Interesting. Do you know whether use of such drugs is lower in those countries?

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now.

Posted by Phil on April 30, 2012, at 13:51:17

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. Phil, posted by ron1953 on April 30, 2012, at 13:20:00

I haven't been here in years for any length of time. I think any of you, coming back after a long absence, would know where I'm coming from.

You know, I would love to be off meds. I wrote every news organization I could think of years ago pleading with them to investigate the drug companies, especially Lilly. It was about the time that Prozac weekly(ridiculous) came out. If I remember right, they sent regular Prozac patients that crap in the mail!!

I've literally had to restrain myself from verbally attacking drug reps when I saw them in doctors offices. I hate the industry.

So, I hate them to but, well, I'm just tired I guess.

It's been nice but I'll be going now. Carry on.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. Phil

Posted by Alexei on April 30, 2012, at 15:53:26

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now., posted by Phil on April 30, 2012, at 13:00:23

@Phil ... If you were including me, I must apologize. I am as pro-meds as they come. They have helped me, and i continue to seek a better regime.

Actually love pharmacology. I'm just a bit frustrated that research of new psychiatric medicines seems to take a back seat to that of other illnesses & diseases.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. Phil

Posted by SLS on April 30, 2012, at 17:01:51

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now., posted by Phil on April 30, 2012, at 13:00:23

Hi Phil.

> I'll be leaving here soon because this was a place designed for people who need help with their meds. Instead it's pretty much a battleground.

This happens every now and then. It has been worse. Frustration drives some people to lash out at medicine for not curing them. That seems to be rather normal to me. Others seem to be driven by a need to preach cynicism as self-appointed gurus of some occult truth that only special people can see. I don't find this at all constructive. Still others perform the very important function of oversight and make visible the problems with the system. You don't need to be a cynic or have an antagonistic agenda to perform in this capacity.

I know people in the pharmaceutical industry who act to facilitate R&D and perform clinical trials. They (the ones that I know) are not driven by greed, but by a passion to produce agents of healing. Interestingly, capitalism and healing can be mutually inclusive. The goal is often the same. It is good business to discover drugs that are valuable enough to sell.

Cynicism turns my stomach.

Critical analysis does not require cynicism to be effective.

Anyway, Phil, I will be sorry to see your name fade from view again. I always found that your posts had a very happy and constructive place in the archives. I am selfish. Your posts are helpful at a time like this, and I wish you were around to maintain some balance in the community.

Do what is best for you - always.

Be well.


- Scott

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. europerep

Posted by g_g_g_unit on April 30, 2012, at 23:56:54

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. ron1953, posted by europerep on April 30, 2012, at 13:40:35


> Well, that's not a problem of psychiatry. It's a problem of the USA. Direct-to-consumer advertising of pharmaceuticals is banned in basically every other country in the world, New Zealand being the only exception I know of.

That said, they still refrained from advertising psychiatric drugs on TV in NZ (at least up until 2 years ago, when I was living there). All I can recall is seeing adverts for OTC painkillers.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now.

Posted by bleauberry on May 1, 2012, at 7:30:25

In reply to Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now., posted by linkadge on April 29, 2012, at 19:35:57

I think it has been rather impotent for quite a few years already. The monotherapy drugs are for the most part rather useless in my opinion. The best psychiatry we have includes, imo, combos that hit both NE and 5htp. In other words, TCA+SSRI combos or MAOIs. The serotonin meds are a cruel joke I think. Granted, once in a while we see a miracle with zoloft or prozac, but really, that isn't very often, maybe what, 1 out of 10?

I think the entire industry got sidetracked on the whole neurotransmitter deficiency theory thing and that's why impotence set in. Depression aint just simply a deficiency of a neuro. That's arrogance and ignorance on display.

When they start making the close links between occult pathogens in the nervous system, inflammation in the nervous system, malicious chemistries in the intestines, the impact of food....such as sensitivities or allergies, lead, mercury, ya know....stuff! Until they start tying it all together into a big picture that actually makes sense, things will stay impotent.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. bleauberry

Posted by Dinah on May 1, 2012, at 8:41:39

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now., posted by bleauberry on May 1, 2012, at 7:30:25

My theory is that things will stay impotent until they're able to differentiate between different types of depression, different types of anxiety.

For example, NE is awful for some types of depression. But until they identify subsets, they'll keep flinging medications at patients. Some of which may help, some of which may hurt, and some of which may miss the mark entirely. Once they identify different subsets and different causes, they can possibly identify additional approaches that might help and have less potential to hurt.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. bleauberry

Posted by Alexei on May 1, 2012, at 9:19:11

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now., posted by bleauberry on May 1, 2012, at 7:30:25

> The monotherapy drugs are for the most part rather useless in my opinion. The best psychiatry we have includes, imo, combos that hit both NE and 5htp. In other words, TCA+SSRI combos or MAOIs. The serotonin meds are a cruel joke I think. Granted, once in a while we see a miracle with zoloft or prozac, but really, that isn't very often, maybe what, 1 out of 10?


I agree with your assessment, bleauberry ... especially with your take on the glut of serotonin drugs and that monotherapy is not likely to succeed in TRD or even MDD. All the "me too" drugs are not breakthroughs IMHO... just money-makers and patent extenders.


I still believe zoloft + TCA is much better than the new snri's... by far. Have been on both effexor and cymbalta, and they are not improvements for me.


And I really do think inflammation within the body and food allergies, hormonal imbalances, and substandard nutrition play a huge role, as well. I wish more docs would speak about these.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now.

Posted by tensor on May 1, 2012, at 11:54:35

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. bleauberry, posted by Alexei on May 1, 2012, at 9:19:11

AAPs are the new SSRIs.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now.

Posted by poser938 on May 1, 2012, at 15:16:37

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now., posted by tensor on May 1, 2012, at 11:54:35

i think drug companies are just going to beat around the bush as long as possible. there would be no logic in coming out with something that really worked miracles on someones brain. especially if it did it in just a short time of taking it.

it would be nice to think they are working towards a drug that you could take once and have it set your brain straight, but that would be bad for their business. so they have people on meds they have to take daily and possibly for the rest of their life. they fare running a business, and it works like a business for them. they have to keep their profits up.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. poser938

Posted by europerep on May 1, 2012, at 16:07:48

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now., posted by poser938 on May 1, 2012, at 15:16:37

> there would be no logic in coming out with something that really worked miracles on someones brain.

Why not?

> it would be nice to think they are working towards a drug that you could take once and have it set your brain straight, but that would be bad for their business.

Maybe it would be bad for business, but it isn't realistic anyway. I can't think of a single drug that treats a chronic condition through a one-time administration of it - including illegal drugs. It just doesn't fit with the general cyclical way a body works.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now.

Posted by poser938 on May 1, 2012, at 16:26:30

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. poser938, posted by europerep on May 1, 2012, at 16:07:48

i saying it wouldn't be logical on the business side for the company.the fewer pills they sell, the less money they make.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now.

Posted by Phil on May 3, 2012, at 7:44:32

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now., posted by poser938 on May 1, 2012, at 16:26:30

I didn't even know that Ketamine was being used for dep? Pretty shocked when I came back here.

But I did see some studies, not sure if they have even begun, that are trying do develop meds with a similar action as Ketamine. I'm not a med guy so...

Can wait to see the SE on those.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. SLS

Posted by psychobot5000 on May 4, 2012, at 17:26:46

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. Phil, posted by SLS on April 30, 2012, at 17:01:51

Scott, bravo for your last post on this thread--drug companies have developed products that helped people I know, and too much cynicism can be a bad thing.

Bravo also to bleauberry's post concerning the overgeneralizations regarding chemical deficiencies and all that that have skewed psychiatry for so long. Though, in fairness, I think it's been a few years since any significant number of psychochemical researchers bought into the notion of the serotonin hypothesis of depression.
That is all.

 

Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now.

Posted by AlexanderDenmark on May 5, 2012, at 2:59:10

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. SLS, posted by psychobot5000 on May 4, 2012, at 17:26:46

> Scott, bravo for your last post on this thread--drug companies have developed products that helped people I know, and too much cynicism can be a bad thing.
>
> Bravo also to bleauberry's post concerning the overgeneralizations regarding chemical deficiencies and all that that have skewed psychiatry for so long. Though, in fairness, I think it's been a few years since any significant number of psychochemical researchers bought into the notion of the serotonin hypothesis of depression.
> That is all.

I think considering all the amount of psyc meds prescribed every year is overwhelmingly high and the pharm companies make billions and billions of dollars, it's safe to say the general agenda of the promoted by them is doing overwhelmingly well and always have.

 

Lou's request-eighjeepharbhn SLS

Posted by Lou Pilder on May 5, 2012, at 14:39:23

In reply to Re: Psychiatry is a bit impotent right now. linkadge, posted by SLS on April 29, 2012, at 19:59:02

> I agree.
>
> > Its 2012. We are still mainly using prozac, zoloft, celexa...SSRIs that we had over a decade ago.
> >
> > I don't think they work very well, but we don't have anything else.
>
> What's scary is that pharmaceutical companies are not investing the resources in developing antidepressants the way they once did. Even Novartis (formally Sandoz) has cut back on their program. They were at one time the most progressive American pharmaceutical company in developing psychotropics. They came in second to France's Servier.
>
> > Psychiatry seems to be a bit impotent right now.
>
> Psychiatry has seemed impotent to me for as long as I have been treated by it - especially when you compare it to other fields of medicine. Man, I was p*ssed when I first learned that they didn't know everything.
>
> > A lot of talk in the past decade, but really nothing new.
>
> The 1990s was supposed to be the "decade of the brain." I bet those who proclaimed it as such now realize their naivety.
>
> > Has psychiatry gone into a resession?
>
> Yup.
>
>
> - Scott

Scott,
You wrote,[...Even Novartis (formally Sandoz)has cut back on their program. They were at one time the most progressive {American} pharmacuetical company in developing psychotropics...].
I am unsure as to whhat you are wantong top mean here. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond aaccoringly.
A. I have been doing great research in relation tha the pharmaceutical companies such a {Novartis.} I do not find that {Novartis} is an American company. Could you post what you used to state here that {they were at one time the most progressive [American} phamaceutical company in developing psychotropics}?
B. Do you know about {I.G. Farben} in relation to either Sandoz or Novartis or both?
C (redacted by respondent)
Lou

 

Re: Lou's request-eighjeepharbhn Lou Pilder

Posted by SLS on May 7, 2012, at 5:07:43

In reply to Lou's request-eighjeepharbhn SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on May 5, 2012, at 14:39:23

My mistakes, Mr. Pilder.

> > What's scary is that pharmaceutical companies are not investing the resources in developing antidepressants the way they once did. Even Novartis (formally Sandoz) has cut back on their program. They were at one time the most progressive American pharmaceutical company in developing psychotropics. They came in second to France's Servier.

> I am unsure as to whhat you are wantong top mean here. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond aaccoringly.
> A. I have been doing great research in relation tha the pharmaceutical companies such a {Novartis.} I do not find that {Novartis} is an American company. Could you post what you used to state here that {they were at one time the most progressive [American} phamaceutical company in developing psychotropics}?

Novartis has its global headquarters in Basel, Switzerland. I had thought that the company was headquartered in East Hanover, New Jersey. However, this is the site for their operations in the U.S. only.

I was wrong in my characterization of Sandoz. It had a history of developing pharmaceuticals in all fields of medicine. It is now a division of Novartis that manufactures generic drugs.

Thank you for the opportunity to correct my inaccuracies.

> B. Do you know about {I.G. Farben} in relation to either Sandoz or Novartis or both?

No. I do not know about that.


- Scott


This is the end of the thread.


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.