Posted by psychosage on April 29, 2004, at 14:44:26
In reply to Re: TELL OPRAH YOU HATE EFFEXOR, posted by Camille Dumont on April 29, 2004, at 13:08:42
I think if you want to get Oprah to take up the cause and to have a show about antidepressants than you have to take into consideration that the manufacturer of Effexor advertises the med in O magazine.
What does this mean? I am not sure.
The heart of the matter lies in the drug claims and indications. Drug marketing needs to be overhauled. Since drugs have been advertised on TV there has been an upsurge in pharmaceuticals.
Drugs aren't medical treatments anymore. When I say I take wellbutrin Xl I am probably making more of a social statement about my emotional problems and my culturally recognized solution than the actual efficacy of that solution. It's like telling someone you are on antidepressants says more about your diagnosis than the fact anything good is happening from them.
I think there should be a new name for them, like flat out just call them mood chemicals. The name for them should be as vague as their mechanism of action because that is what they really mean.
The fact Zoloft is a more potent dopamine reuptake inhibitor than Wellbutrin tells me a lot about how the drug companies want us to believe the story about Zoloft more than the reality.
I think one main problem is when to stop taking the drugs. One can never tell if an AD should be maintained for preventative measures. I don't think all drugs are appropriate for maintenance therapy. Our brains adapt and change, so even at the same dosage a drug that initially was theraputic and life-saving even can start to cause negative effects.
Is there a single class of psych drug that is never taken for maintenance?
I think SSRIs are generally anesthetics. They blunt your emotions so you don't kill yourself after the initial improvement and feelings of well-being that have nothing to do with improvements in life circumstances. Even if they do make you feel better eventually the blunted effect will take over. Most of us have experienced it, right?
I don't have qualms about the chemicals themselves. I have issues with how they are marketed, prescribed and how I've been socially conditioned to believe they are really "antidepressants".
This is something that will take time to untangle because it will take collective experience over time to really figure out how we have to socially perceive the chemicals and how doctors and scientists figure out how to use them and generate claims about them that are more responsible.
i myself vacillate on whether or not antipsychotics are really worth the side effects to treat bipolar or if SSRIs are tolerable in low doses or for a short-term course. I feel Risperdal really helped save my life during a one-week self-admitted stay in a hospital psych ward, and Zoloft lifted me from the depths of my first major depressive episode at 19 years old. However, a subsequent 5-month course with Zyprexa ruined my life physically, emotionally and spiritually. After the initial month on my first AD ever, Zoloft, I was rather indifferent, hypomanic and compulsive. I think if I stayed on 50 mg for about two months and got off I would have been fine instead of being pumped up with 150mg a day.
Zyprexa helped me gain 35 pounds, and I developed neck and posture troubles that sent me into my first ever experience with physical rehabilitation for an entire summer at a center where the patients were 50 years older than I am. i wish I stayed on a minimal 2.5mg instead of the 10mg even though none of it changed a single symptom I had. Even though I was sedated physically, my mental anxiety became even worse since I was so concerned about my daily functioning.
Naturally, I am in the midst of attempting another antidepressant change.
poster:psychosage
thread:1016
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20040429/msgs/341381.html