Doctors continue antidepressant prescriptions despite warning

E-llusion

E-llusion

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Nov 3, 2002
Messages
5,975
Location
ALASKA
HALIFAX - Last summer's warnings of the dangerous side effects of certain antidepressants on teenagers haven't stopped Canadian doctors from prescribing them.

INDEPTH: Depression Medications

Health Canada warned in July that Paxil and Effexor should not be prescribed to anyone under 18 years of age because they may increase the risk of suicidal thoughts.

But sales of the drugs have dropped only slightly since then, which suggests that doctors haven't changed how they prescribe the drugs.

Dr. Marshall Korenblum, chief of psychiatry at the Hincks-Dellcrest Centre in Toronto, says he has read Health Canada's warnings and the research, but still prescribes Paxil and Effexor to teens.

"I'm not sure that those studies are valid or completely proven yet. I'm a bit of a skeptic," says Korenblum.

Dr. David Healy, a world-renowned expert on antidepressants, says doctors need more extensive research on the effects of antidepressants on teens.

But Healy says he's doubtful drug companies will conduct those studies because they may show increased risk of suicidal thoughts and may affect sales to adults as well.

Doctors are reluctant, though, to abandon drugs that have worked for their patients if the risk is small.

The new research suggests teens are at higher risk of thinking about suicide only when they first start taking the drugs.

"It's not an outright ban. It's more in the nature of a strong caution," says Korenblum.

"My approach has been just to watch and monitor more closely than I have before," he says.

http://www.cbc.ca/storyview/CBC/2003/10/27/Consumers/teens_paxil031027

Doctors continue antidepressant prescriptions despite warning
Last Updated Mon, 03 Nov 2003 12:01:40
 
Last edited:
Follow-up to the same story

Depression Medications
Amina Ali and June Chua, CBC News Online | May 16, 2002

* This information is intended for information purposes only. It's not intended to be a substitute for consultation with a physician.

An estimated one million Canadians suffer from some form of depression. The Canadian Mental Health Association says one in 10 people will suffer from depression during their lifetime. According to the World Health Organization, depression will be the second-leading cause of disability in the world by 2020, trailing heart disease.

Antidepressants are used to treat serious, continuing mental depression that interferes with the person's ability to function. They were first developed in the 1950s and now there are almost 30 different medications on the market. They all work by altering the way in which certain chemicals, called neurotransmitters, work in our brains.

Quick Facts
Canadians being diagnosed and treated for depression: 2.72 million in 1993 to 7.8 million in 2000. Amount spent on antidepressants rose from $161 million in 1993 to $543 million in 2000.

Source: IMS Health statistics

Neurotransmitters are chemicals that transmit signals between the cells in our brains — they are involved in the control of mood and other functions related to eating, sleep, pain and thinking. In depression, some of these chemicals aren't working properly so antidepressants boost the activity of these chemicals in our brains. It may take several weeks for the drugs to start working.

Stan Kutcher, head of the department of psychiatry at Dalhousie University and a leading expert in depression, says medication can help 60 to 80 per cent of people suffering from the condition. (Globe and Mail, Jan. 7, 2002)

Kutcher says the best approach is a combination of medicine and counselling.

Classes of Antidepressants

There are three main classes of antidepressant drugs: tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and monoamine oxidase inhibitors. Some combinations of these classes of drugs can be dangerous.

Quick Facts
Prescriptions for antidepressants have increased 64 per cent between 1996 and 2000. Paroxetene (Paxil) leads the pack and is the eighth most commonly prescribed drug in Canada. More than three million prescriptions were filled for Paxil in 2000.
Source: IMS Health statistics

Tricyclic antidepressants
How do they work?
Neurotransmitter levels are reduced during depression, but scientists don't know how tricyclic antidepressants improve mood. They do know the drugs inhibit the reabsorption of two neurotransmitters, norepinephrine and serotonin, into the transmitting neuron. In the process, the receiving neurons get extra stimulation.

Tricyclic drugs are classified according to their relative sedating or alerting properties. Psychiatrists may prescribe a more sedating drug for a depressed patient who tends to become agitated. If the depression is associated with lethargy, then a more stimulating drug may be chosen.

Advantages
Tricyclics are inexpensive compared to newer antidepressants and are often the first drug prescribed. They were developed in the 1950s and some people with chronic, long-lasting depression have taken tricyclics safely for decades.

Disadvantages
Most common side effect is faintness (syncope) caused by a fall in blood pressure. It is usually not serious but elderly people may be injured in falls and should be started on a smaller dose. Some possible side effects:

confusion
constipation
difficulty urinating
feeling faint
rapid heartbeat
Weight gain and drowsiness are common reasons why patients stop taking tricyclic antidepressants.
Quick Facts
Psychotherapeutics, which include antidepressants, are the second most dispensed drugs in the country, behind heart drugs. Five per cent of the population is severely depressed at any one time.
Source: IMS Health statistics

Examples : Amitriptyline (Elavil), Clomipramine, Desipramine, Doxepin, Imipramine (Tofranil), Nortipyline (Pamelor)

Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors

How do they work?
As the name suggests, Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors work selectively to raise the serotonin levels in the brain (as opposed to tricyclics, which act on two neutrotransmitters.) It's thought that reduced transmission of serotonin plays a role in depression.

Advantages
According to the home edition of the Merck Manual of Medical Information, SSRIs tend to cause fewer side effects than tricyclics and are generally safe in people with depression and a coexisting physical disorder. Also, SSRIs have not caused the increased heart rates associated with tricyclics. SSRIs offer a nonsedating, nonaddictive antidepressant for treating anxiety.

Quick Facts

Depression rates among people aged 65 and older exceed 11 per cent
Serious symptoms of depression are found in 15 per cent of the elderly population
The rate is as high as 50 per cent in nursing homes
Source: Canadian Family Physician

Disadvantages
Unlike tricyclics, SSRIs lack a track record of long-term use and are more expensive. CBC Radio's Quirks & Quarks medical columnist Dr. Miriam Shuchman said there are about 25 individual case reports of patients becoming acutely suicidal within a week or two of taking a common SRRI, Prozac. Many more, larger scale studies haven't found an increased risk of suicide among patients on Prozac.

Possible Side Effects

gastrointestinal: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea
nervous system effects: insomnia, anxiety and tremor
sexual dysfunction, including loss of sexual desire

Examples: Fluoxetine (Prozac), Paroxetine (Paxil), Sertaline (Zoloft)
Monoamine Oxidase Inhibitors (MAO Inhibitors)

How do they work?
Monoamine oxidase is an enzyme that normally breaks down neutrotransmitters. Monoamine oxidase inhibitors inactivate this enzyme leaving more of the neutrotransmitter to produce an antidepressant effect.

Advantages
Monoamine oxidase inhibitors may be particularly helpful for people with atypical depression symptoms such as overeating, excessive sleeping and anxiety, panic attacks and phobias; those who failed to improve on tricyclics; or anyone with a history of responding to MAO inhibitors or who has a family member successfully treated with these drugs.

Quick Facts

Only about 6 per cent of Canadians with depression are properly diagnosed and treated
Depression is now the chief cause of disability in companies
Disability costs four to 12 per cent of a company's payroll
Depression costs the Canadian economy $16 billion annually in time off and lower production
Source: Business & Economic Roundtable on Mental Health

Disadvantages
People taking MAO inhibitors must follow strict dietary restrictions and precautions, such as not eating foods or drinks containing tyramine. Tyramine is found in beer on tap, red wine, and in foods that have been aged, fermented, pickled or smoked, or contaminated with bacteria. These include salami, aged cheese, fava beans, yogurt and soy sauce. Combining MAO inhibitors with these foods and drinks can lead to a rare but severe high blood pressure or even a stroke or heart attack. Other classes of antidepressants and some over-the-counter cough and cold drugs must also be avoided when taking MAO inhibitors.

Possible Side Effects
The side effects of monoamine oxidase inhibitors are similar to those of tricyclics:

Fall in blood pressure which may cause fainting
Dizziness
Fainting
Headaches (may worsen migraine headaches)
Insomnia

Examples: Moclobemide, Phenelzine (Nardil), Tranylcypromine (Parnate)

Other
The Merck Manual of Medical Information lists psychostimulants such as methylphenidate for depressed people who are withdrawn, slowed and fatigued or haven't improved on the other classes of antidepressants, but it warns the abuse potential is high.

Psychotherapy and electroconvulsive (shock) therapy are two non-drug treatments for depression. Some studies suggest the natural remedy St. John's Wort may help in treating milder forms of depression. Lithium is used to treat people with bipolar depression (manic depression).

Sources:
Merck Manual of Medical Information, home edition (17th edition, 2000)

Berner, Mark and Gerald Rotenberg (eds.) Canadian Medical Association: New Guide to Prescription and Over-the-Counter Drugs (1996, Reader's Digest Association (Canada) Ltd., Montreal

Link
 
"Thugs, sex, and money make da world go 'round" - Wu Tang Clan


Simple proverb, but it is so true. People sell heroin to addicts knowing what it is going to do to them, knowing they may die, knowing their life is going nowhere but down. People sell methamphetamine to addicts knowing the potential physical damage it can cause, knowing it is a dangerous drug. People sell rouge chemicals marked off as ecstasy knowing someone may mix it with the real deal and die, knowing someone may have siezures, seretonin syndrome, become hospitalized, or worse. People sell crack cocaine to pregnant mothers knowing what it is going to do to the child inside. People sell guns knowing those guns are going to kill people. Pharmecutical giants force feed a brain dead society their drugs knowing they can cause, "confusion, constipation, difficulty urinating, feeling feint, rapid heartbeat, weight gain, drowsiness," and suicide. Why do people do these things?

Money.

Doctors will continue to perscribe drugs such as zoloft and paxil knowing full well they are strongly linked to teen suicide, mania, and psychosis. The giant corporate drug lords will continue to manufacture their 'normality in pill form' untill there is no longer a demand. Illegal drugs will never ever dissapear because of the demand. Legal drugs will never dissapear so long as they have a market. Opium farmers will always create heroin so long as the world demands them to. For the same reason, pharmecutical companies will continue to pump out gargantuan amounts of oxycontin knowing how many people may become addicted to our post modern lotus. It all boils down to money.

I dont want to name any names, or point the finger (with reference to corporations) but I work for a doctor who shares the same views as me towards the psychopharmecutical revolution, and most people do not know the extent these companies go to to 'push their drugs.' Our worldwide DEA creates images of thuggish scoundrels that conjure pure evil and feed society death and destruction as they sit back and suck up the revenue. These giant medical manufacturers are these same thugs, they produce the same substances, and geedily consume the same revenue. They enter your doctors office with their little drug pushing minions. Their minions smile, feed your doctor, pamper him, front to his staff on how nicely they are dressed, and how nice the office is, they kiss your doctors ass, suck his cock, and give them their fancy pamphelts, drug samples, and contact info. These drug pushers dont wear colored bandanas, baggy jeans, and pack heat while standing on a street corner pushing whatever that city likes. These drug dealers wear cheap suits, drive volkswagons, wear fake smiles, and have very brown noses. Its all the same. Its all drugs, no matter how you view the situation. Its all about money, no matter how you view the situation.

FUCK the psychopharmecutical revolution. I am happy being a manic depressive without your mind control pills.

- THE WOOD
 
THE WOOD said:
"Thugs, sex, and money make da world go 'round" - Wu Tang Clan


Simple proverb, but it is so true. People sell heroin to addicts knowing what it is going to do to them, knowing they may die, knowing their life is going nowhere but down. People sell methamphetamine to addicts knowing the potential physical damage it can cause, knowing it is a dangerous drug. People sell rouge chemicals marked off as ecstasy knowing someone may mix it with the real deal and die, knowing someone may have siezures, seretonin syndrome, become hospitalized, or worse. People sell crack cocaine to pregnant mothers knowing what it is going to do to the child inside. People sell guns knowing those guns are going to kill people. Pharmecutical giants force feed a brain dead society their drugs knowing they can cause, "confusion, constipation, difficulty urinating, feeling feint, rapid heartbeat, weight gain, drowsiness," and suicide. Why do people do these things?

- THE WOOD
Click to expand...


While I agree with part of this, I think you are making antidepressants out to be much more "evil" than they really are. Its not like the majority of patients attempt suicide after being prescribed this.. As a sufferer of depression, Id much rather endure some of those physical symptoms, than be unable to function outside of my room because i feel so down..

However, to treat depression with medication means you are going to have to become dependant on some chemical.. Right now, Ive chosen another.. :) However, when the need comes, I'll prolly make the switch.

Yes it's about money. But the money wouldnt be there if it didnt work at least a little bit.. The public may be ignorant but they are not stupid.
 
(all i am really doing is bitching and ranting - so dont take anythign i say too seriously)


While I agree with part of this, I think you are making antidepressants out to be much more "evil" than they really are. Its not like the majority of patients attempt suicide after being prescribed this.. As a sufferer of depression, Id much rather endure some of those physical symptoms, than be unable to function outside of my room because i feel so down..
Click to expand...

na na na i never said the drugs were evil, i was trying to say that those drugs are the same as illegal drugs on the level that, they are drugs, they alter consciousness, and are distributed amongst the masses by drug dealers in order to gain money. They dont care about side effects, they dont care about anything but money - that was the point.

I have *nothing* against the chemicals themselves. Some people like caffiene in the morning, some people like morphene, some people like nothing. If you take a perscription drug and it makes you feel fine or relieves your pain or helps ease your mind, excellent. I dont care if you take prozac, or effexor, or zoloft, or whatever have you. Thats fine.

I *do* have a problem with these companies wanting to perscribe every damned person in the universe their drugs so they can make money. Read this forum more often, and you will find pleanty of articles pertaining to 'increased 5 year olds on adderall' and so on and so forth. I feel like 20 years from now, more people will be on antidepressants, or add/adhd medication, hell ill even expand it to acid reflux medication and allergy medication. The freaking drug companies come to our practice like 45 times a day. Believe me, in 5 minutes they will have you convinced you have acid reflux, need antihistamines, are depressed, and could use some drugs to help you concentrate better.

I dont think drugs are the answer. I think if society has this many depressed people, then we need to fix society, not put everyone on drugs.

Take it for what you want, but don't kid yourself - the psychopharmocological revolution needs a lot of work if it is to actually stay with us. My feelings is that it could be used for good and has been amidst the confusion, but there is a lot of corruption to be dealt with and I don't see it built on strong enough foundations to really affect our lives permanently for good unless that changes. Any drug is only a temporary solution to the problem, but medicating a huge majority of our society to forget about their shit will only further the problem. In my opinion if I want to suppress pain I'll take illegal drugs over any white market one's, but I'm not into that game, so please people, please- let's work towards a society which can handle the pain and not see it as a deterrant to freedom, but a step to real growth.
Click to expand...
sorry thats a crock of absolute meaningless bullshit. I mean that in the nicest way possible.

Yes it could be used for good. However, it is not. It is a profit source. And with that, I am not condemning anything - if I had some sort of manufactured good and could make billions from it, I would be out there pushing my MFG instead of sitting in front of this computer. I never said anything about those drugs being 'evil.' I do my share of drugs and think its all the same. I know that if they could force feed their drugs to every living being in existance, they would.

It really isnt an "evil" thing, it just pisses me off that people need to wake up and see that these horrid demonized drugs 'invading' our country are no different from ones you pick up at the pharmacy. I can take some whackass maoi that i *know* is not entirely healthy for me, and its viewed as a good thing - whereas I cant sit down and relax over a nice pipe after a hard days work.

A few friends of mine in the psychology field also believe this is a poor way to appease people. These drugs dont heal anyone, they (allegedly) just shove your problems under the carpet for a while (which, from a psychological perspective, is not healthy). Drug companies know this, and would love to convince you otherwise. Perhaps insurance/health and benefits plans should begin to include psychological services?

The term "psycho-pharmecutical revolution" was coined by individuals who share this view. Its not an accepted term for the new influx of psychological medicines flooding the free world - its a derogatory term used to describe a corporate takeover. If someone feels depressed and wants medication, talk to your doctor. The medication doesnt need to be pushed on people the way it is. They dont need to convince people they need their product as though it was some sort of bargain lawnmower or new vacuum. They dont need to advertise their drugs on television like its some sort of beacon of light in a sea of agony and dispair. They are thugs - drug dealers - whatever you want to call it, they just wear nicer clothes and have brighter smiles (and again, browner noses).

Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Merk, Phizer, what have you; in my mind they are the equivalent of your neighborhood dopeman.
 
This article only summarizes the whole 1hr show they had on CBC on this topic, they had an "undercover" patient go into a normal doctor's office saying he's feeling a bit down and less than 5 mins later, he walks out with Paxil script. "Check back with me in a month" said the doctor, we'll see how it goes. Problem is most suicide cases happen within 2-3 weeks of first taking the drug. Recently the makers of Paxil settled a $6Million law suit with a family of a person who commited suicide within two weeks of taking it. Condition of the settlement ? They would NOT admit Paxil may cause suicidal tendencies , but rather just issue a "written warning" with a script about possible side effects. I wish I had a transcript of the whole program but I could not find it.
 
^^^^^
Let's not forget that people who takes this kind of medication usually has some kind of mental unstability to begin with. Because of this, we cannot conclude that these drugs causes thoughts of suicide.

And how about all the people who commits suicide without taking antidepressives? We have to take into account the percentage of people on antidepressives who commit suicide, versus the percentage of people not taking these drugs who also commits suicide. I don't know the numbers, but to conclude that antidepressive drugs can lead to suicide is to take it too far, IMO
 
excellent insight, WOOD.

I don't have much to add to this thread, other than that paxil = the devil.
It definately should not be prescribed to anyone under 18 .. when you're a teen, you always have your share of problems. I was put on paxil when I was 13 just because I was getting in some trouble, and all the f*n doctors I was sent to were convinced I was depressed or deranged. It really didn't do a damn thing for me (my main complaint was that I couldn't pay attention in class, it certainly didn't help that). They kept upping my dosage, had no noticable effects/benefits .. but when I ran out for a week, I had withdrawl hell. That's not a fun thing when you're 14 or 15 and have no knowledge/experience with such matters.

now these companies are pushing drugs on even younger kids, as if the other 200 million Americans who apparantely all have problems aren't a big enough market.
Even with drugs that do have recognizable benefits [i.e. a drug to treat some sort of disease/sickness], it is clear the bottom line is money, as the Pharm. companies refuse to allow cheaper versions of the same product to be sold in poorer nations to help the local population, as that would undermine profits.

Know why there hasn't been any action in the US to bring about more subsidized health care? It would cut into the company's profits.

The DEA tells us buying drugs on the street supports terror. Even if that were true, I'd feel better doing that than supporting US Pharm. companies. It's more ethical.
 
^^^ I agree with you about the pharm companies being in it all for the money, but why shouldn't ssri's be prescribed to anyone under 18? I took celexa when i was 16, my family has a history of clinical depression, and it helped me while I needed it, then when I felt like my mindset was better, I stopped taking it. It was a pretty effective treatment for the symptoms of depression, while I dealt with the processes of it mentally. Without it I don't think I would have made any progress yet (I sure wasn't making any back then). Perhaps if the prescribing processes for things like adderall or paxil were much more thorough the drugs would make it to the people that need them rather than the hordes of kids that parents don't know how to handle.

As far as pharm companies pushing drugs on kids, isn't that really the doctor's job? You don't go into the doctor's office and talk to a pharmaceutical rep who convinces you that your 6 year old needs adderall, you talk to a doctor. I realize pharm reps are the ones talking to the doctors, but I think it is the doctor's responsibility to properly diagnose, not to give in to the marketing scam of zoloft or paxil or any other drug. If anyone should be labelled as a pusher or a dealer, i think it's the prescribing physician. And yeah, they are definately handing out a lot of shit that people just don't need.
 
I just wanted to mention that insurance plans DO provide for psychological treatment.
 
now im mad stoned so sorry if this makes no sense

^ thanks for enlightening me on that, had no idea.

/gets head checked!

As far as pharm companies pushing drugs on kids, isn't that really the doctor's job? You don't go into the doctor's office and talk to a pharmaceutical rep who convinces you that your 6 year old needs adderall, you talk to a doctor. I realize pharm reps are the ones talking to the doctors, but I think it is the doctor's responsibility to properly diagnose, not to give in to the marketing scam of zoloft or paxil or any other drug. If anyone should be labelled as a pusher or a dealer, i think it's the prescribing physician. And yeah, they are definately handing out a lot of shit that people just don't need.
Click to expand...


Youd think that way, but its alot more complicated. First off, the doctors see drug reps in their office about 50 times a day.

Have you noticed the increase in random assed items with drug labels all over the freaking world (excluding commercials)? Claritin billboards on the highway, people with zoloft pens, viagra coffee mugs, paxil desk calculators, levaquin staple removers - the list applies to nearly anythign you can think up. I was at someones house (in my college town) the other day and saw a damned allergra clock on their wall - i asked, heh who works for a doctor? And the person who owned the clock stated that it was given to him by the doctors office. The 'advertisements' are everywhere these days!

The non-stop round the clock exposure to these new drugs creates so much familiararity and thus alot more sales.

Secondly a way for most doctors to be kept up-to-date with the fast paced discoveries and trends in medical science is through large medical journals. These journals act sort of like newspapers pertaining to medicine, and are written very scientifically with a strong focus on the newest trends/discoveries. These journals, much like any other form of media, sometimes have their own motives. Remember the case of the study where scientists injected monkeys with "mdma" and showed how deadly/neruotoxic the drug can be? Remember how those scientists later discovered it was methamphetamine not mdma they used? Since I dont like to point fingers when it comes to topics of discussion like this, im just going to say it was a very widely read and very popular medical journal which published that study. After it was published by that particular journal, I was certain that there were ulterior motives JUST to make mdma look bad to the medical community. These journals talk quite alot about what we are discussing with respect to this news article. Journals get their scientific data from the companies that make these very drugs. I am not saying everything they inform on is entirely biased in parmacutical business' favor, but you have to understand that it curtails a level of bias.

Thirdly, pharmacutical organizations will never flat out tell those whom they sell their drugs things like you are reading in the article with a 'scientific tounge.' They will always tell the 'truth' with a sale in mind. Now combine the above two points ive made with this point. These new pharmecutical drugs are in a doctors face twenty four hours a day. The doctor is only perscribing what he/she feels is best for his/her patient. Its extremely complex, and I dont understand it completely, otherwise I would have to be a doctor myself.

Again im not really saying any of this is a wrong thing - its just a current trend in postmodern business (because drug manufacture is not a medicinal aspect before it is a business aspect) that may be causing more harm than we see. I believe hundreds of years from now, the children will be taught this in history books just as we are taught that doctors used to 'heal' patients by bloodletting.
 
And what's wrong with a little bloodletting?

I thought you'd be happy to know, Wood, that Arnold blows up a Xenedrine truck in Terminator 3.

I guess I will say that the discussion you all are having is similar to an exercise I did in the 10th grade, where we assessed responsibilty for all parties involved in the Holocaust.

The pope, the guards, the people who turned on the gas...
A little disturbing, but still, I think it was a good exercise to realize that all involved are in a way responsible.
It trickles down.

The doctor should be informed, and make the decision HE feels is right. The drug rep should NOT lie and tell what he knows. Is the chemist who created the drug at all responsible?
 
Ugh. Imagine if a "side effect" like this could be sometimes attributed to pot use. IMAGINE the PSA's they would come out with.

This is a sick hypocritical world.
I hate anti-depressants.
 
Actually I see where you're going. A hypothetical situation...

A doctor that is exposed to a pro-drug of choice blabbering by reps all day may naturally come to believe a lot of what is said to be beneficial for a patient. He's exposed to similar information in medical journals, which he expects will keep him up to date, and that only further fuels a positive opinion of all these medicines.

NOW, a patient comes in, and for fifteen minutes or so lays down some story about being depressed for several months, constantly anxious in social situations and has "lost interest in activities that he once enjoyed!"

The doctor starts thinking.... gotta treat this person, gotta help them out. What's the best thing for depression? Recommend councelling? Psychotherapy? But what can I do? Hmmm. That guy in here pitching Lexapro said it is helpful in the treatment of these symptoms with less reported side effects and an increased success rate. I'll start him out slow with 5mg and taper up...

I feel like I let the doctor off as too innocent, because I refuse to believe that they don't recognize the bullshit they're being handed by pharm reps, but there IS a lack of options.

I guess everyone involved needs a good spot check :)
 
My own 2 cents:

Prescription drugs, especially powerful narcotics like Zoloft, Paxil and Oxycodone SHOULD NOT BE advertised to the public, they should be reviewed in medical journals only and given evaluation samples to qualified doctors. The public gets brain washed by the ads for powerful mind altering drugs and requests them by name when visiting a doctor's office. There is something wrong with that picture. Just look at at the amount of anti-depressant sales increase since they more or less have been started advertising to general population.
 
pusher.gif
 
K, I'm a 19yr old and I've been on alot of anti-D's over the years... and I must say, I am suprised by the drugs that they warned about... been on paxil and effexor among others... paxil caused me to stop sleeping entirely, but was otherwise helpful... effexor cause acute stumach pains and a "zombie" like state... not the worst side effects I've had among anti-D's... I personally thought they would warn about Zoloft, and it's sister drug, Celexa... as both of those induced a psychotic episode in me... but that's just what I though, I tend to be rather sensitive to Rx drugs...
 
From personal experience I can say that anti-depressants are capable of relieving depression, but what I found most of the time was that they just made my highs higher and my lows lower and I fluctuated inbetween constantly.
I wasn't even THAT depressed when I was prescribed Paxil and Adderall. Overtime my depression got worse and worse, my doses larger and larger. I got klonopin, provigil, and zyprexa added to the mix. Eventually I snapped and tried to kill myself. I found balance and continued and then repeated the same cycle of increased dosage + increased number of meds => another suicide attempt. (note: I always took the dosages I was prescribed and never abused them ever)

I was only like 17 years old when they started me on this shit and in less than 3 I had tried to kill myself twice. Finally after some intense introspection I realized it was mostly the drugs fucking with my head and not the shit going on in my life or with me that was causing my depression. I quit taking everything and didn't tell a soul (not my doctor or my parents) for a few months. After tremendous improvement in my life - everything got better, it was like I was a new person (or my old self again) - I told my mom and doctor what I had done and they were stunned. I never went back and will never go back. People need to deal with their problems themselves (or with somebody to guide them). Giving somebody uppers, downers, SSRIs, and other shit to cope with problems only makes those problems worse overtime.

Oh and SSRI withdrawl is a MOTHERFUCKER. They don't tell you that when you go on them. (And sexual disfunction sucks bigtime when you are a teenager.. those bastards!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top