• The Dark Side 💕 Welcome Guest 💕
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Notable Threads Urgent Hotlines
    Bereavement Mindfulness
    Suicide Support Anger Management
  • TDS Moderators: AlphaMethylPhenyl | paranoid android

Mental Health The Myth of The Chemical Cure: A Critique of Psychiatric Drug Treatment.

Me again. I just wanted to point out that people who use stuff like MDMA will often take 5-HTP because they're worried about a depletion of Serotonin(temporary)after they come down.
I've taken 5-HTP for depression, and it worked well; I was taking quite a bit. But it stopped working after a few weeks.
Most of us know what 5-HTP is, but for those who don't, it's a precursor to Serotonin.
 
theSpruceGoose said:
By chemically depressed, I mean a depression that is caused by chemical imbalance. And that is treatable by drugs that aim to correct the imbalance. I'm by no means an expert on depression, but there are different types. I mentioned the depression that heroin withdrawl causes(in me). I've gone to MDA(LOL) Mood Disorders and Addiction groups, and there are very few people that AD's have helped. We are in a minority when it comes to the type of depression that we have. My addiction counselor came up with the term 'Chemical Depression.'
Now get a load of this: Before becoming depressed, I smoked weed quite a bit and never had a problem with it. As soon as depression hit, weed has made me extremely paranoid and anxious. It's just not smokable. I've tried growing different strains in order to find a strain that doesn't bother me, but I have not found it. I no longer grow btw.
Click to expand...
I still don't understand what you mean by 'chemically depressed' ?

There has never been a single scientific study in the entire history of Chemistry, Biology or Psychiatry to ever demonstrate that there is even any such thing as a 'chemical imbalance' ... Not one. Zilch. Zero. Nada.

No study has ever entertained the probability of a 'chemical imbalance' and in turn, no study has ever demonstrated that SSRIs (or any other 'anti-depressants') work by 'correcting' this allusive 'imbalance.' It is, as the title suggests... a myth.
 
i love this thread and agree with you

if i only could get some people around here to listen to this. i too been to several psychiatrists and they fed me antipsychotics, antidepressants and benzos. never helped. what did help was me reading and learning all i could about depression, anxiety and changing the way i thought, that i now realize how fucked up was.

while i do believe that chemical stuff do play a role in emotions - we all know that's how drugs work - i believe it doesn't play a major role in depression. i know that at least my depression/anxiety problems came from fucked up thought patterns/behaviours/beliefs.

some people get effects from SSRIs - my mom swears Prozac is the drug of happiness - but i'm pretty sure it's placebo. i've seen the power of placebo myself when i was with a terrible case of pain in my intestines and took 2 MSIR 10mg pills and in half an hour the pain was gone. then like a week later i tried to get high off the pills - same bottle - and swallowed like five of them and felt very little. the pills were long expired and after some other oral doses i concluded they were gone bad, but they did cure my pain.

shortly i THINK most cases of major depression are not from chemical imbalance, but from learned depressive behaviours and all that jazz. but i still believe chemicals play a role in our emotions - just not long term - for example this is by far my favorite subject to talk about now but i don't feel like typing much because i feel lazy because of the weed. i had to push myself to right something beyond 'i love this thread' tbh -. i'm pretty sure if i was on coke i'd write a book right now.

peace
 
theSpruceGoose said:
*snip*
Click to expand...

You're a very ignorant person.

The book is critically acclaimed and was written by a professor of Psychiatry, Dr. Joanna Moncrieff, challenging the 'myth of the chemical cure'. Her stance is also backed up by other Psychiatrists such as Dr. Steve Ilardi and Dr. Ron Leifer who both argue that there is no evidence that supports the monoamine hypothesis, or what you refer to it as 'the chemical imbalance theory'.

And funnily enough, (as I've already mentioned - but you've probably not bothered to read) my own Psychiatrist admits that there is not a single shred of evidence that supports such theory. So what is the answer as to why 4 fully qualified doctors state that there is no evidence at all suggesting that a person's brain is depleted of a neurotransmitter such as serotonin, norepinephrine or dopamine?

The answer is that there is none. I've challenged you, or anyone else in this thread, to find a single independent scientific study (i.e. not sponsored by big pharma that sell you the drugs) that supports the monoamine hypothesis.

To flip it upside down, if clinical depression (MDD) was caused by a depletion of:
Serotonin levels, why does Prozac/Fluoxetine not simply just 're-balance' these levels and provide a 'cure'?
Norepineprhine levels, why does Vestra/Reboxetine not simply just 're-balance' these levels and provide a 'cure'?
Dopamine levels, why does Viaspera/Amineptine not simply just 're-balance' these levels and provide a 'cure'?

Or if all three neurotransmitters are 'imbalanced', what about a drug that inhibits the re-uptake of all three? That'd surely work, right?
So if it is caused by depleted levels of Serotonin, Norepineprhine and Dopamine, why does Venlafaxine/Effexor not simply just 're-balance' these levels and provide a 'cure'?

Think about it...

The answer?

Because the theory of a chemical imbalance remains just that. A theory...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
theSpruceGoose said:
*snip*
Click to expand...

Are you aware that it is not possible to measure levels of serotonin/norepinephrine/dopamine within the brain?

How can you support a disease based model, when the effects of drug treatment on neurotransmitters are immeasurable?

You will never know if they were low 'chemically imbalanced' and thus you will never know if they have been 'rebalanced'.

Dismissing the fact that the efficacy of most ADs in treating MDD are no more than a placebo in nearly all double-blind studies, I wholeheartedly believe that their effects have to be attributed to other factors.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rybee said:
I love your arrogance.

But...

Question: Where in that study does it suggest evidence of a 'chemical imbalance' ?
Answer: It doesn't.
Proof: Read it yourself.
Click to expand...

Causes of depression
Stressful life events
Medical problems
Medications for other conditions
Changes in brain function
Family history: The role of genetics*
Click to expand...

I didn't read it. To read it, I would have to pay the $20.
 
Last edited:
yes, the serotonin theory has long been dubunked. nonetheless, antidepressants can be extremely efficacious drugs. just because we don't understand how things work, it doesn't mean they don't. just because a drug doesn't work for everyone, it doesn't mean it doesn't work.

clinical studies are difficult to conduct on ssri drugs, since you just don't know how long you have to conduct a study for, because we don't yet know why they start working when and if they do.

it's no placebo, not even by a long shot. i've seen friends and family members benefit greatly from ssri's. it was a complete turning point in their lives. and for those that know it's working for them, you'll often hear them say "i can't believe i was living life the way it was".
 
SSRIs efficacy is substantially predicated on BDNF influx as well as the increased proliferation of other neurotrophins.
 
OP, the main flaw in your argument is that it looks like you are basing your entire belief system on one source. That book. I'm not saying this subforum should hold its posters to a university standard but even for a high school paper a teacher would require more than one source. Walk into a grad school class and proclaim you have found the truth.....in one book. You'll be laughed out of the room if you submit a paper with less than 20 academic sources.

You are quick to call people arrogant and other names but you came in here pushing this one book like some Bible-thumper. It would take a lot more than a single book to change my mind that these meds do work for some people and they work for me.
 
I dont know about this OP. I never had that bad anxiety, it was brought on recently due to substance abuse/other crap and venlafaxine did a pretty good job crushing my anxiety. It destroyed a lot of my motivation too, but that is expected given we use anxiety (well, small healthy levels anyway) to get stuff done so really there is no such thing as a free lunch, I had to learn more self discipline to give myself a kick up the ass to do stuff more so than when I didn't take any AD. The plus side is anxiety has gone from unbearable heart palpetations to pretty calm. I can't seem to fuck off runumerating thoughts but this is enough. I also lost my gf/went pretty shit for about a year in my degree
 
Jerry Atrick said:
OP, the main flaw in your argument is that it looks like you are basing your entire belief system on one source. That book. I'm not saying this subforum should hold its posters to a university standard but even for a high school paper a teacher would require more than one source. Walk into a grad school class and proclaim you have found the truth.....in one book. You'll be laughed out of the room if you submit a paper with less than 20 academic sources.

You are quick to call people arrogant and other names but you came in here pushing this one book like some Bible-thumper. It would take a lot more than a single book to change my mind that these meds do work for some people and they work for me.
Click to expand...
I don't think you've bothered to read my posts or this thread properly?

If you had done, you'd realise that the title of the book is the basis of discussion, not the source. You'd have known this if you'd read the thread.

I've cited several sources that do not support the monoamine hypothesis. The book being just one of them... Again, you'd have know this if you'd read the thread.

By the way, I've not questioned the efficacy 'anti-depressants'. Again you'd have know this if you'd read the thread.

I've stated that there is some evidence that 'anti-depressants' are no more effective than placebo's in double-blinds, and that there is some evidence that 'anti-depressants' are slightly more effective than placebo's in double blinds. Again, you'd have know this if you'd read the thread.

I've never stated that 'anti-depressants' don't work. I've stated that there is no credible or substial evidence to support the monoamine hypothesis. Again, you'd have know this if you'd read the thread.

Thus, I am lead to believe that any efficacy that they do have, must be owed to another mechanism. Again, you'd have know this if you'd read the thread.

Please read the thread in full before commenting in the future... If anything it just makes you look slightly stupid.

cassius14 said:
I dont know about this OP. I never had that bad anxiety, it was brought on recently due to substance abuse/other crap and venlafaxine did a pretty good job crushing my anxiety. It destroyed a lot of my motivation too, but that is expected given we use anxiety (well, small healthy levels anyway) to get stuff done so really there is no such thing as a free lunch, I had to learn more self discipline to give myself a kick up the ass to do stuff more so than when I didn't take any AD. The plus side is anxiety has gone from unbearable heart palpetations to pretty calm. I can't seem to fuck off runumerating thoughts but this is enough. I also lost my gf/went pretty shit for about a year in my degree
Click to expand...

Though this thread isn't really directed at anxiety, more Clinical Depression or Major Depressive Disorder... I too believe that TCAs SSRIs, and SNDRIs such as Venlafaxine (Effexor) can be quite effective in relieving some forms of anxiety. Having tried all three classes of drugs for Generalised Anxiety Disorder I'd say that Venlafaxine (Effexor) was the most effective. Though considered the complete emotional blunting, sedation and fatigue that it left me with, I'm not surprised it worked well.

I don't believe the anxiolytic effects of Venlafaxine (Effexor) are so much as an intended cure... but rather a side effect of a taking a rather powerful drug.
 
Just typing in google "chemical imbalance myth" a ton of interesting sites come up.
I personally don't know if it is a myth or not, the only thing I know is that SSRI are proven no more effective than a placebo (slightly less actually) with potentially devastating side effects.
IMHO, there is much more to the human mood than chemicals, without ignoring their huge importance of course.

this is one of the articles I read and found it interesting and informative.
 
Looks like another interesting article on the subject... Thanks for sharing it. :)

Just a few quotes for those that cannot be bothered to read it:

However, there is one (rather large) problem with this theory: there is absolutely no evidence to support it. Recent reviews of the research have demonstrated no link between depression, or any other mental disorder, and an imbalance of chemicals in the brain (Lacasse & Leo, 2005; ( Valenstein, 1998 ).


Valenstein clearly and systematically dismantles the chemical imbalance theory:
1.) Reducing levels of norepinephrine, serotonin and dopamine does not actually produce depression in humans.

2.) The theory cannot explain why there are drugs that alleviate depression despite the fact that they have little or no effect on either serotonin or norepinephrine. (I'd cite Agomelatine/Valdoxan, which I've tried personally with brilliant results, for example)

3.) Drugs that raise serotonin and norepinephrine levels, such as amphetamine and cocaine, do not alleviate depression.

4.) No one has explained why it takes a relatively long time before antidepressant drugs produce any elevation of mood. Antidepressants produce their maximum elevation of serotonin and norepinephrine in only a day or two, but it often takes several weeks before any improvement in mood occurs.

5.) Although some depressed patients have low levels of serotonin and norepinephrine, the majority do not. Estimates vary, but a reasonable average from several studies indicates that only about 25 percent of depressed patients actually have low levels of these metabolites.

6.) Some depressed patients actually have abnormally high levels of serotonin and norepinephrine, and some patients with no history of depression at all have low levels of these amines.

7.) Although there have been claims that depression may be caused by excessive levels of monoamine oxydase (the enzyme that breaks down serotonin and norepinephrine), this is only true in some depressed patients and not in others.

8.) Antidepressants produce a number of different effects other than increasing norepinephrine and serotonin activity that have not been accounted for when considering their activity on depression.


Finally, there is not a single peer-reviewed article that can be accurately cited to support claims of serotonin deficiency in any mental disorder, while there are many articles that present counterevidence. When all of this evidence is taken in full, it should be abundantly clear that depression is not caused by a chemical imbalance.




For those that have been constantly attacking me in this thread... I'd really like you to systematically address the 8 points cited here. I'm not having a go at you, it's open to debate as part of a fun discussion on the subject. So if you could try and rebut any of those points, I'd really like to hear them..! Maybe we can even find some common ground.

Though in light of that brilliant find by CN95... I reiterate that I do not believe in,


The Myth of the Chemical Cure...
 
Last edited:
I've shown you evidence that AD's work for some people. Just because they don't work for you, doesn't mean they don't work for others.
 
theSpruceGoose said:
I've shown you evidence that AD's work for some people. Just because they don't work for you, doesn't mean they don't work for others.
Click to expand...

You're missing the point of this thread and you've been missing the point of the thread since the first post. I do not contend that AD's do not work. I never have done.

This thread is not debating whether or not AD's work... it's debating whether or not the monoamine hypothesis works...

And for what it counts, I've already cited that I responded very well to Agomelatine, an 'anti-depressant' if you want to call it that. Please stop de-railing the thread with these constant remarks.
 
I was having a very similar discussion with a colleague recently. Her contention was that SSRIs increase serotonin in the brain, and they cure depression, therefore depressed people must be low on serotonin, otherwise how could increasing serotonin help she asked?

I countered with SSRIs aren't the only thing that help depression are they? There are drugs like bupropion which help with depression, but only increase norepinephrine and dopamine.

So maybe the people that respond to SSRIs have low serotonin and the people that respond to bupropion have low dopamine/norepinephrine? Not likely when you consider that many people will respond to EITHER of those drugs despite completely separate mechanisms.

Then you add in other effective antidepressants that hardly effect any of those three neurochemicals - opiates, ketamine, ECT, etc. If depression was as simple as one unbalanced neurochemical or another then you would expect one or another of those treatments to work, but certainly not all of them.

So what do all of those treatments have in common? They all stimulate the birth of new neurons in the brain, and they all increase the connectivity of existing neurons in the brain. Depressed individuals have the opposite pattern, less neurons, less connectivity. That's the leading hypothesis for how they work, and you don't need any neurochemical deficiency for them to be effective (although there is something to be said for increased stress hormones in depressed people, but that's another story).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top