• H&R Moderators: VerbalTruist | cdin | Lil'LinaptkSix

Are Anti-Depressants Over Prescribed

Blue Lava

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 22, 2001
Messages
6,594
Are anti-depressants over prescribed?
I wonder. Anti-depressants are being prescibed in record numbers here in the US as I'm sure is the case in many western nations. Two things in particular that alarm me are:
1) Is our society avoiding natural, necessary negative emotions simply because we can? What are the consequences of not feeling pain?
2) I become very alarmed when I see anti-depressants being used to 'treat' teenagers. Recalling my own teenage years... they were very tumultous and filled with deep felt emotions and wild mood swings. This seems normal to me... for a teenager. Yet, often I think that parents are getting their kids on this stuff to medicate their 'problems'... which only a few more years of growing can really cure.
So, what you think?
 
I think they're extremely over-prescribed w/ the thinking that they're magical drugs. No drug is going to do everything without some effort on your part (ie therapy). Also, people seem to think of them as almost harmless when in fact they can be dangerous. I saw a Paxil commercial the other day that said it was non-habit forming? Yet you get withdrawal symptoms...As for the kids issue, definately! I know a ton of people my age (17-21) that are on or have been on anti-depressants. Depression is a part of life, yet I don't think some people realize that.
 
I think they're the easy way out of most problems we encounter today. Psychiatrists are quick to prescribe them no matter what your ailment -- Anxiety, Insomnia... I mean, come on, there are better ways to deal with things like this.
Anxiety? In most cases, SSRI's _increase_ a person's level of anxiety. Yes, there have been cases where something like Paxil has been a godsend for someone... but, realistically, this isn't generally the case. I personally think Benzo's should be a bit more accepted; doctors should stop being afraid of prescribing these types of medication to people who are truly in need. Luckily for me, I found a doctor that wasn't a benzo-phobe and got the treatment that I needed.
Insomnia? Same thing. More anxiety means you PROBABLY won't be able to get to sleep.. or at least, get to sleep and STAY asleep for a good period of time. That's why products like Ambien are on the market.
And, hell, even for depression.. it's questionable. We still don't really even understand the mode of which these medicines work. Again, a lot of people don't react favorably to SSRIs for depression, either...
I think alternative medicines should be tested more frequently. Things that actually work. I'm a strong believer that opiates would cure most, if not all cases of depression (maybe not the most severe cases, but MOST). Sure, you've got addiction to worry about, but, honestly, who cares? You'll probably be on your SSRI for the rest of your life, too... why not an opiate?
 
I do think AD's are overprescribed, and I agree with precisely what you've said. In particular I think SSRIs are overprescribed. More adverse effects are reported with Prozac than with any other pharmaceutical!
SSRIs are not 'habit-forming' or addictive, but they do lead to dependance. There is a difference -- one doesn't CRAVE SSRIs one usually gets withdrawal symptoms when discontinuing treatment.
SSRIs only (usually) increases anxiety ACUTELY -- with continuous treatment the anxiety subsides and then improves, in most cases.
I dislike that so little thought goes into psychiatry these days; rather than taking the time to determine a drug that suits the patients needs properly, or taking the time to go through therapy, doctors are often just throwing any old SSRI in the patient's face.
Still, I think that antidepressants have their purpose. There really are people who need to be medicated, and for these people antidepressants are a godsend.
Opiates are not good for treating the vast majority of depression, for a whole variety of reasons.
Btw, you all might be amazed to learn that I plan on going into psychiatry! Hopefully I'll be able to be a better doctor.
[ 23 August 2002: Message edited by: fairnymph ]
 
I dislike that so little thought goes into psychiatry these days; rather than taking the time to determine a drug that suits the patients needs properly, or taking the time to go through therapy, doctors are often just throwing any old SSRI in the patient's face.
So who prescribes drugs in the US? Do you actually go to psychiatrists for a script for antidepressants? (when I was on zoloft in the UK it was my GP who put me on it - with about 5 minutes thought and not even an effort to consider any alternative - it worked fantastically well, but still).
I remember NYTFLY always used to argue that anti-d's were actually underpresribed in the US. But I tend to agree with Blue Lava, there's almost an attempt to avoid any sort of pain, whereas pain is a basic part of the human experience.
 
Yes, GP/family doctors often prescribe AD's -- which is a huge part of the problem IMO. If you have a mental illness that is severe enough to need medication, then you should see a specialist.
The care I have gotten from psychiatrists specializing in my disorder vs the care from general drs or psychiatrists is significant. Finding a good doctor whom you communicate well with and feel comfortable with is essential.
 
Yet, often I think that parents are getting their kids on this stuff to medicate their 'problems'... which only a few more years of growing can really cure.
I think this is 100% true. A few years back I thought I needed to go on anti-depressants, but now that I look back at it, it was just me growing up and now 2 years later I am so happy.
 
I become very alarmed when I see anti-depressants being used to 'treat' teenagers. Recalling my own teenage years... they were very tumultous and filled with deep felt emotions and wild mood swings. This seems normal to me... for a teenager. Yet, often I think that parents are getting their kids on this stuff to medicate their 'problems'... which only a few more years of growing can really cure.
I do not agree with this. Sure, just like with any medication there are some people (in this case, teenagers) that shouldn't truly be receiving the medicine they are getting from their doctors. But this thought, that teenagers don't really suffer from depression, and that it's just simply "being a teenager" as oppossed to real, clinical depression, is completely outrageous. I am 16 and was hospitalized last November for major depression, and cutting myself. I spent 11-days at a pediatric inpatient ward and met a few other kids my age with similar problems. Some of them were just there for "safety", and came and left without being put on any medications. I did not. I went there for the specific reason of finding the right medications to treat me. It is now almost a year later, and I still battle with my depression every day. I see my psychyatrist once a week, and she has diagnosed me with major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, situational anxiety disorder, insomnia stemming from depression, and early signs of borderline personality disorder. I currently take 40mg of celexa, 1mg of risperidal, 8mg ativan, 2mg klonopin and 10mg ambien a day to deal with these disorders. For you to say that what I am dealing with, and have for the past year (and probablly longer, but I didn't acknowledge it as a real problem until then) is just the emotional baggage that comes along with "being a teenager" infuriates me. I suppose if I was 50-something this wouldn't be serious mental illness either, it would just be a mid-life crisis right? All I'm asking is that you rethink your statement, and understand that maybe your teenage years seemed tough, and it was just adolescence, but that there are plenty of teenagers out there with very real depression, just as real as any 25 or 37 or 42 year-olds.
 
/\/\/\
Relax. Just because I said what I did does not mean I think there is no place for psychotrophic medications. I was a social worker, working directly with mentally ill people for many years. Some of the schizophrenics and other psychotic people I worked with were absolutely fuct without medication. By 'fuct' I mean they could not relate to other people and were thus cut off from society. That sucks. People should feel they are a part of this thing we call humanity.
I'm just expressing some general reservations about our ability to alter our chemistry, and the wisdom of that. Funny coming from a drug user, huh? It's just that evolution, something outside our control, has always helped us adapt to change. When we use drugs, we are taking control. I don't know that we are all that smart for a bunch of hairless monkeys. I think about what's going on with anti-biotics and there overprescribtion. Bacteria's are getting stronger and more resistant and our natural defenses are becoming more dependent on our inventions. I'm not saying this is all bad. But, I think we need wonder a bit more about what we our doing.
 
I agree that AD's tend to be over prescribed.
I have used them on 2 seperate occasions - once for a period of 6 months and also currently, for the last month & a half. On both occasions, (each with a different psych) I was directed to start a course of AD's within the first half-hour of the first consultation.
I say 'directed' because I see a pyschologist not a psychiatrist, and psychologists cant prescribe drugs. So I had to go see a GP to get the script - again, 2 different GP's - and both of these doctors had no issues at all with prescribing me antidepressants after I had barely been in their offices for more than 5 minutes.
So yeah, I think AD's are overly regarded as the catch-all treatment for the whole spectrum of psychological problems.
In my own case I know that my need for them - at times - is real, - I have tried managing depression without medication through other means but there are certain periods where I just cant do it without chemical assistance. These are the periods when my depression severely affects me being able to go about my normal life.
I agree with Fairnymphs comment about the very little thought that currently seems to go into psychiatry. I would like to see doctors and the public being more educated about when it is appropriate to prescribe/use AD's rather than them being the first option turned to.
More care and attention needs to be given to analysing a patient's history and exploring ways to treat the cause of the depression. At the moment doctors just seem to be one-stop-antidepressant-shops.
I would also like to see more monitoring of patients on AD's - in my case I have found that it's up to me to experiment with cutting down/going off the meds and seeing how I cope rather than my Dr's judging when the 'right time' to come off is, based on my progress. Then again, maybe the individual is the one best placed to know when the right time is, cos only you can know how you feel? I dunno... I just think that lots of people take Dr's words as gospel and unless they were specifically told to come off the meds and try managing without them, they might think they have to saty on them forever and a day...
*edit* Oh yeah, I also wanted to add that I think for most people, AD's dont necessarily stop people feeling natural & necessary negative emotions. I still have 'normal' mood swings, ie things can and do still make me sad, hurt, down etc etc. They're not a magical 'happy' pill (those ones are illegal ;) ). For the people who need them, they stop these 'normal' negative emotions (which are a part of life) turning into all-consuming things which stop them from feeling positive about anything. :)
[ 28 August 2002: Message edited by: lilgreendinosaur ]
 
It has been clinically shown that the human brain goes through an extensive 're-wiring' session during the last few years of puberty, although the not all parts of the brain make this childhood-adult transition at the same time. Very often the emotional parts of the brain will adapt themselves to adulthood before the rational and logical areas of the brain do, at least that's what 'Teen Species' on TLC says (thank god for cable, I'd be such a bored insomniac without it ;) ).
Basically, most of the emotional hub-bub that teenagers go through (especially in the years 16-1 8) is COMPLETELY normal. Alot of crazy shit is happening in our head and bodies, and unfortunately our brains at the time just aren't in the right state to handle all the pitfalls that teenage life tends to toss our way. It does go away tho, I used to be so emotionally troubled and anxious, I was convinced the world hated me and I worried myself stupid about everything, my emotions were careening out of control with nothing there to slam on the breaks and give me a serious reality check.
A few years down the line and I feel a million bucks better, my life just makes sense. I can handle my emotions much better now because I can logically and rationally analyze them and take them for what they are, something which simply didn't seem to be there when I was a few years younger.
There are of course exceptions to this rule, there are some teenagers who are genuinely troubled and have a serious need for psychotropic medications to help them function in their day to day life. I'm just becoming a little troubled at western socities need to medicate and sedate a teenagers tumultuous(sp?) rite of passage into adulthood.
 
I agree with fairnymph that much of the problem is with GP's who know little about ANY mental disorders. I have been coerced into taking them when I went to a walk-in clinic with a complaint of insomnia. I had been to the same place several months earlier for severe headaches and he pointed that out on the chart. And he asked if I was moody lately. I said yes I was irritable because I was having so much trouble sleeping. So 3 general symptoms of depression and he says you are depressed, here. No self-respecting psychiatrist diagnoses disorders because the correct number of symptoms in the DSM-IV are present. That's only the start.
However, most people who are depressed go untreated (many don't seek treatment, others visit unsympathetic doctors), and thus depression is undertreated. And although GP's aren't the most knowledgable people about depression, it would be better for them to overprescribe them (or prescribe them with little background knowledge) than to underprescribe them. The potential negative effects are outweighed by the chance that the depressed person will not seek psychiatric help and possibly commit suicide (something like a 10% suicide rate if untreated). Of course, that's just my opinion and no I don't take AD's.
 
Given the very heavy risk profile of SSRI's and SNRI's ...I would say definitely.
When 25% of the population you administer them to (for a period 5 months) is going to develop serious permanant "side effect" (Lets be real here..Call brain damage...brain damage). Add in the risk that 2-10% (higher in men) are going to develop permanant sexual problems from their use.
That's above 1 in 3. That's a serious risk, and it isn't being discussed with patients -- not by GP's, nor by Psyches. All of the SSRI and SNRI class has pronounced withdrawal. All of them cause changes in the structure of the brain.
Given that profile -- they are very much over used. There may still be patients who benefit from them. There are patients who benefit from anti psychotic medication (which has an even higher percentage of users who will get permanant damage from them) -- but it shouldn't be the first tool you reach for.
The person who mentioned opiates for depression... This was a fairly common practice in earlier medicine. Unlike the SSRI's and SNRI's they haven't been shown to cause long term brain damage in users. Are they addictive? Yep. Do SSRI's cause physical dependence? Yep. What's the difference? Not much in my opinion. One of the off label uses of the drug Ultram is just that - used to treat depression. Does it work? Yes. Is it much safer than the SSRI's? Maybe, Ultram wouldn't be my first choice to use either. (Look at how Venlafaxine works, look at how Ultram works. Notice a similarity? Yep) It's highly unlikely your doctor will be writing Oramorph for it any time soon. Not that the science isn't there, it is. But public perception is heavily weighted against that science being used. (As well as several large entities that have no business in healthcare ..like the DEA)
It's interesting to note that doctors are more scared of using benzodiazepines for anxiety (because of addiction) than they are SSRI's. Even though SSRI's show a greater degree of addiction, and more signifigant withdrawal in a larger number of users.
Unfortunately this game is all perception -- not reality based. There has never been any work whatsoever anywhere in the world at any time or any place in any study ever conducted --- which has shown that serotonin has any direct effect on depression. The situation is much the same with dopamine and schizophrenia. Their research into the addictive qualities of drugs is slightly less in the "voodoo" science area, but most of it falls into that catagory as well. Yeah, I know you've all seen a billion dollars of advertising saying the opposite of what I am saying -- but go out and look for yourself. It just isn't there.
Go talk to people on SSRI's, and those who got off of them. You can find at least 30,000 hits on Google for "SSRI's and Sexual Dysfunction". Most of the "medical" sites are still towing the company line of calling permanant injury a temporary side effect -- but even some of those have come around. (Harvard School of Medicine for instance.)
The FDA only test these things for 6 to 8 week trials. You can bet the drug companies did some longer term work, but they wont be anxious to publish them. Most of the indications were there even in the short trials. Reality is, the real testing is on the general public. Good luck to you if you choose to go down that path with your doctor, may the legal system be kind to you in the end (it wont).
 
One quick search of the web:
http://www.radicalpsychologytv.org/SSRI.html
Increased risk of breast cancer from SSRI.
http://www.mercola.com/2000/june/24/antidepressants_breast_cancer.htm
Changes in Rat Brains from SSRI's (I want the actual study...)
http://www.mercola.com/2000/mar/12/antidepressants_change_brain_cells.htm
They published an interesting article.. so did Scientific American and Science
http://www.humangivens.com/Editorial4.html
Interesting article on form 3500 ...The adverse event form the FDA uses to track drugs on the market. Guess what drug is #1? Prozac. But it's okay..You'll find all of the widely used ones in the top 12!
http://www.angelfire.com/fl5/bipolarnoise/News/ResptoUUMDCArticle1.html
Links to Autism and things I have personally observed in MMDA and esctasy users ...
http://www.drugawareness.org/Archives/2ndQtr_2001/31801New.html
 
>(Lets be real here..Call brain damage...brain damage).
Come out with a reputable source for this statement! I am positive no neurotoxic action of SSRIs at normal levels has been identified. That study about rat brains linked to says nothing. Its no differnt than the fact that if you immerse cells in LSD or milk you cause genetic damage...but this doesn't mean mil or LSD taken normally cause such damage.
I agree there aren't that many long term studies but this doesn't mean that their are really serious long term consequences in normal users. Moreover, most data you see is going to be nearly useless because peoples psychological states determine when and how much prozac people take.
The problem that I have with SSRIs/SNRIs etc.. is that they really aren't miracle drugs but the existance of low risk ADs like these makes doctors more reluctant to use other methods which might be more appropriate for some people. On the other hand I think that the existance of these low side effect drugs has had the great benificial effect that many people who would not have been treated before now are recieving some help (i.e. those people properly classified as dysthymic(I think that is right word...meaning unhappy but not clinically depressed).
No! While short term SSRI treatment may increase anxiety long term treatment has been shown to be quite effective in treating anxiety. In fact this is even an FDA approved use of paxil..meaning a bunch of controlled studies have been done to this effect.
Finally what are some people babbling about "depression is a part of life" Short brutish existance was a part of life until modern medicine, sanitation etc.. solved these problems in the developed world. Do you want to get rid of these things to?
It sounds like you are saying there is some sort of essential value to pain/unhappiness. Where the fuck do you get this idea? If you really believed it you could be using thumb screws on yourself! No one should EVER feel bad.
I challenge you to provide any sort of convincing argument that unhappiness is good (be aware nothing prevents you from having variable levels of being quite happy and the abscence of unhappiness certainly doesn't mean we don't learn certain things are bad or should be avoided).
I think the problem (apart from the US's crappy puritan heritage) is that people have alot of suffering in their lives. It is very difficult psychologically to admit to yourself that all the pain you went through was meaningless. Haven't you noticed people who have suffered greatly for some goal (say an unjust war) have a great deal of difficulty accepting that that goal, or means of achieving that goal were not in fact good.
This is exactly the philosophy which keeps drugs illegal. Its quite clear that people aren't really objecting to them because of their delitorious side effects but rather because they somehow let you have 'unfair' happiness.
I say fuck all that. I am devoting myself to the great neurochemical tower of babel. Eventually science will allow us to really bring heaven to earth.
Check out hedweb.org (or .com I think).
 
SacredNaCl: I haven't had time to read those links thoroughly - I just thought I'd point out that I'm a bit sceptical about accepting as fact something published on angelfire (which is a free web hosting service, my brother also uses it). Basically, anyone could build a page there and write whatever they wanted - I'd want to see some scientific evidence for what she says (especially as she's claiming that prozac causes increased sexual desire, when in most people its the opposite).
 
The person who mentioned opiates for depression... This was a fairly common practice in earlier medicine. Unlike the SSRI's and SNRI's they haven't been shown to cause long term brain damage in users. Are they addictive? Yep. Do SSRI's cause physical dependence? Yep. What's the difference? Not much in my opinion. One of the off label uses of the drug Ultram is just that - used to treat depression. Does it work? Yes. Is it much safer than the SSRI's? Maybe, Ultram wouldn't be my first choice to use either. (Look at how Venlafaxine works, look at how Ultram works. Notice a similarity? Yep) It's highly unlikely your doctor will be writing Oramorph for it any time soon. Not that the science isn't there, it is. But public perception is heavily weighted against that science being used. (As well as several large entities that have no business in healthcare ..like the DEA)
Opiates were once used for depression because that's ALL THEY HAD! Certainly opiates and other escapist drugs are better than nothing when it comes to severe psychotic disorders/depression....but they pale in comparison to the efficacy of SSRIs and other antidepressants. Opiates also have FAR more potential for addiction (which SSRIs do NOT have...dependance is most certainly not the same as addiction, and SSRIs, unlike opiates, are very rarely abused).
Ultram is NOT an opiate, it is an opioid, and has significantly less abuse potential than true opiates. Furthermore, the reason it helps depression is because it has serotonin reuptake inhibiting properties...thus it ACTS LIKE AN SSRI...and may well have the same sort of 'neurotoxicicity issues' that you are so concerned about.
http://www.radicalpsychologytv.org/SSRI.html
This article expresses an opinion, and does not provide references.
Increased risk of breast cancer from SSRI.
http://www.mercola.com/2000/june/24/antidepressants_breast_cancer.htm
The studies were not conclusive; they state only that there MAY be a link.
Changes in Rat Brains from SSRI's (I want the actual study...)
http://www.mercola.com/2000/mar/12/antidepressants_change_brain_cells.htm
Yeah, of course there are brain changes...1) that is the point of antidepressants and 2) if you inject an animal with over 30 times the safe/prescribed amount of ANY drug, you can expect a substantial negative reaction!
They published an interesting article.. so did Scientific American and Science
http://www.humangivens.com/Editorial4.html This is an editorial based largely on OPINON, and again, does not reference studies etc. Commentary on such complex neurological matter is basically worthless without concrete scientific backing.
Interesting article on form 3500 ...The adverse event form the FDA uses to track drugs on the market. Guess what drug is #1? Prozac. But it's okay..You'll find all of the widely used ones in the top 12!
http://www.angelfire.com/fl5/bipolarnoise/News/ResptoUUMDCArticle1.html The data on the reports of adverse reactions from pharmaceutical drugs does not take into account the number of people taking each drug. Prozac is one of the most widely prescribed drugs; thus of course it naturally results in a larger number of adverse reports than other, less frequently prescribed drugs. Again, this information means very little unless we know the total number of patients on prozac -- so that we can determine what PERCENTAGE of these patients report adverse reactions. Thus, it may well be (and I strongly suspect) that many other drugs produce a higher PERCENTAGE of adverse reactions.
Links to Autism and things I have personally observed in MMDA and esctasy users ...
http://www.drugawareness.org/Archives/2ndQtr_2001/31801New.html
There is one rather vague comment that suggests that 'other serotonergic medications may be involved with autism also' -- again, not conlusive, merely a very theoretical guess.
[ 29 August 2002: Message edited by: fairnymph ]
 
The data on the reports of adverse reactions from pharmaceutical drugs does not take into account the number of people taking each drug
Also, plenty of these 'adverse reaction' type studies include all negative experiences suffered by people while recieving a drug treatment (not necessarily ones caused *by* the drug). For example, if you look at the MDMA literature, one of the deaths listed as possibly MDMA-related was of a person who died from asthma - because he had MDMA in his bloodstream, it was included in the fatalities for MDMA. Could be the same thing happening here.
 
If you read one citation I give, read this one:
http://www.antidepressantsfacts.com/Prozac-Backlash.htm
Do SSRIs cause brain damage? Well, first we have to define “brain damage”. Changes in the structures of the brain would seem to qualify. We have plenty of documented evidence of changes in the hippocampus. Changes in the structure of proteins also qualifies, disease like cystic fibrosis are caused by exactly such changes of proteins – the only difference being that those occur in primarily in the lining of the lungs instead of the brain and nervous system.
When they are talking about brain cells developing “corkscrew” shapes that is exactly what they are referring to. Changes in protein structure do indeed occur. All of the above are documented. (The work with the rats did indeed include 4 administrations of the drugs at levels vastly exceeding the amounts used in typical therapy. They are just now doing work on rats in moderate doses for longer periods of time. We await those results. I would also add that the total cumulative dose the rats received was not beyond the normal range used in therapy. They just got their 20-30 doses at once, then a month later, the same – rather than taking them daily in a division of that dose for the month. Not the best study in the world.)
But what do we mean by changes in the brain or proteins or new growth? Consider how the body works for a minute. You want to build new muscle mass in a muscle? You do this by creating a stimulus for it. Working out – you tear muscles and new growth occurs as your body repairs the damage. ECT is a similar process, where you create a trauma to the body to stimulate changes in brain chemistry. It’s my opinion that the effects you see from serotonin agents like SSRIs are precisely that. They inflict a chemical trauma to the brain & the body reacts to that trauma. That depression relief occurs at all is a tribute to the minds ability to adapt to a sudden imbalance of chemicals running through it, not due to an initial imbalance. Further support for this idea comes from the onset of action of the drug itself. You can measure blood levels of serotonin and SSRIs hours after administration, the principle side effects can be noticed within a day or two, when does onset of depression relief occur? 4 to 8 weeks after. What is happening in those 4 to 8 weeks? If it were truly a case of serotonin being absent, would not increasing those levels dramatically bring near instantaneous symptom relief? (BTW, this doesn’t even occur if you put a person on IV serotonin. Numerous studies have been done attempting to find a direct causal link between serotonin and depression all have failed to find it. They did however find out about serotonin syndrome from this work and it’s led to some interesting theories about autism & organic brain disease both of which have elevated levels of serotonin as an indicator.)
Evidence of brain damage from SSRIs includes: tinitis (caused by the drug Venlafaxine HCL, otherwise known as Effexor™. It has also occurred with the drug Prozac™.) Tardive Dyskinisa has been documented with Prozac™, Luvox™, Zoloft™.. Uncontrollable muscle spasms that continue for years after taking SSRIs & SNRIs are more evidence. Facial and muscle “tics” are yet another documented occurrence of brain damage from SSRIs and SNRIs. Memory loss, and trouble with verbal recall (remind you of say another serotonin affecting drug, MDMA?) are again documented with the use of SSRIs. As are autistic like symptoms in a small minority of patients. I would add that these symptoms are listed in the PDA under the cryptic title “Extrapyramidal Syndrome” for several SSRIs. Don’t let the name fool you it means: acute dystonic reaction, parkinsonian syndrome, akathisia, akinesia, "rabbit syndrome", tardive dyskinsia (TD), neuroleptic inducted dyskinesia, neuroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS). What causes EPS? Neuroleptic drugs, including SSRIs. What is EPS (sometimes referred to as EPR in the literature,) It’s brain damage, pure and simple.
The “standard of evidence”, while there aren’t controlled clinical trials for long term use of these drugs available, there are more than 100,000 adverse event reports, the experience of patients themselves, doctors experiences, and a wealth of anecdotal evidence. There aren’t clinical trials for long-term methamphetamine use either. Yet we have a wealth of evidence pointing to their neurotoxicity. I will also point out that the adverse events are bizarre for SSRI class drugs. Most drugs you see events reported 500 times for a handful of symptoms. SSRIs you see events reported over 500 times for dozens of completely different items. Serotonin affects far more in the body than just transferring a few chemicals between synapses in the brain.
It is illustrative to look at the evidence for other neuroleptic agents and how the evidence for them being neurotoxic came to light & eventually became accepted knowledge in the medical community. When you do, you find an alarming similarity to the case for SSRIs being neurotoxic. It’s well known that anti psychotic medications like Thorazine™ cause the full range of EPS, EPS is just a polite way of saying brain damage and avoiding terms that strike fear into patients and put dollar signs into lawyers eyes like “Tardive Dyskinisa”.
SSRIs do, in fact, share many things in common with amphetamines. MDMA, while being an amphetamine itself, also shares many things in common with SSRIs. When you look at brain scans of people who have used them for long periods of time you would be hard pressed to tell a difference. Now, mind you, a scan is not quite the same as cutting someone’s skull open and examining the tissue under a high power microscope, but we’re not that barbaric of a society. The coroner’s office would be a good place to start doing research of this kind however. Anyone got a couple hundred grand to put up for a study? It’s a logical end to finding or not finding this type of damage. No drug company, FDA, or other government entity has to my knowledge volunteered funding.
One of the interesting things SSRIs have in common with amphetamines is the phenomenon of “teeth grinding” http://www.neurologychannel.com/NeurologyWorld/teeth.shtml. And one from the Mayo clinic same topic: http://www.mayo.edu/comm/mcr/news_921.html This shouldn’t be at all surprising when you realize the chemicals amphetamines & SSRIs affect.
http://www.citizen.org/ELETTER/ARTICLES/stuttering.htm SSRIs can induce stuttering along with a host of other vocal recall, and memory problems.
There was a reference to sexual promiscuity during mania as a result of SSRIs. While the effects on performance and desire are reduced for most people (if not eliminated entirely in some men who take them), mania is a whole different animal. People experiencing mania have been known to have delusions of grandeur, go on multi thousand dollar shopping sprees, have methamphetamine like psychosis including going several days awake at a time, go full blown psychotic, initiate long distance relationships, engage in casual sex and other risky sexual behaviors, sell everything they own and move to a foreign country, start new businesses (with no capital to back them up), even occasionally murder people while in a state of psychosis. Religious delusions are not uncommon either. Nor is the behavior of driving 120 mph through a crowded area in a ‘flight’ of paranoia to escape perceived enemies. Use of SSRIs and SNRIs in people who are bi-polar is risky for these reasons and all of them carry a warning about this in their packaging.
 
Top