Posted by JohnL on April 27, 2000, at 5:43:18
In reply to Dr Martin Jensen, posted by Fred Potter on April 26, 2000, at 20:21:40
> I have read about Dr Jensen and his methods and while sounding very hopeful, it doesn't sound correct that someone will respond say to Prozac after a couple of days or even hours. Any views on his methods?
> FredI was Jensen's biggest critic. No one disagreed with him more than me. I preached to everyone how he was a quack and a get-rich-quick-scheme. I hate to admit being wrong, but I was actually way off base. After reading his workbook, and then speaking with him personally, I can no longer find any fault in his strategy. He is merely searching for the BEST drug for each person. Not just ANY drug that works somewhat, but rather the BEST one. Sampling and trial-and-error is the only way.
It reminds me of a scientist once who set out to disprove the Bible. The problem was as he gathered more and more scientific evidence, it was actually supporting the Bible and not refuting it. His best scientific efforts actually proved the Bible. Not what he set out to do. This atheist scientist is now a devoted Christian. It was kind of the same with me and Jensen's book. I bought it with the intention of ripping it to shreads and drawing people's attention to every fault I could find. But it turned out just the opposite. Instead I discovered all the faults in MY beliefs.
Do people really respond in as little as one day or one week? Definitely. From threads going back months to a year ago, I remember a lady commenting on how Wellbutrin worked for her immediately--no long trial needed. A child was feeling better than ever during his fourth day on Effexor. Personally I responded very fast to Adrafinil. I also felt immediate improvement the very first day with St Johnswort. And it continues.
There are actually plenty of real life examples, but we often don't see them unless we are looking for them. Then we find they're all over the place. But of course we see more of the opposite here...the long drawnout frustrating painful trials of meds that aren't correct for the person's chemistry. As everyone here knows, I've been in that camp for a long long time.
If a med is a superior match for a person's chemistry, it will indeed provide fast results with few side effects. The longer the wait, the farther away the med is from targeting the problem directly. Instead there is a trickle down process that takes time.
But it' worth noting that Jensen does not replace traditional psychiatry with his methods, but rather uses his methods to enhance and speed up traditional psychiatry. He does not abondon one in favor of the other. They go together. There are sporadic cases where quick responses just don't happen, and a longer wait is justified. He also knows that improvement will continue with longer trials, but that the early initial reaction is a solid clue as to what to expect down the road. To sum it all up, he's in search of the BEST med that works for a person, not just ANY med that works. ANY med might take six weeks to work. But the BEST med will do so in a week or less. Now that you are aware, keep your eyes and ears open. You'll see real life proof of these quick responses.
JohnL
poster:JohnL
thread:31396
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20000420/msgs/31441.html