Posted by chemist on December 27, 2004, at 10:31:04
In reply to Re: This Is an Outrage Wyeth/Eli Lilly are Liars!!, posted by crazychickuk on December 27, 2004, at 6:29:54
hello there, chemist here...i find this thread particularly fascinating: there are calls for instigation of legal action against eli lilly, wyeth, and organon - i suspect from the citalopram business that forest ought to be included as well - yet not one implicates action/inaction on the part of the patient. most of us who are capable of navigating the waters of the internet and operating a computer ought to be savvy enough to read the labels on the package in which medication is dispensed. the physician - however rotten they might be - most likely continues to prescribe medication for a patient after discussing the matter with the patient. regardless, patient + physician does not = marriage for life. nor does it include a binding clause to continue to take the medication if it is not working.
tobacco companies in the u.s. have not been model corporate citizens since their inception, but the warning label on the cigarette carton - and the links to emphysema, lung (and other) cancers, and heart disease - states clearly that the product is not good for enhancing one's health.
producers of alcohol-containing beverages do include - by law, i suspect, but no matter - warnings stating that one should monitor their intake of alcohol, do not drive an auto while intoxicated, and that using alcohol while pregnant, for instance, is not a wise choice (to put it mildly).
of course, the liquor store proprietor and convenience store clerk do not require the purchaser to hold a prescription: rather, proof of age (usually) is sufficient. thus, the patron is one's own prescribing physician for cigarettes and alcohol. the clerks do not send their customers from the premises with stern directives regarding addictive potential, withdrawl, adverse effects, and so on.
why should a pharmaceutical company be held liable for a physician and patient agreement? i do qualify this statement not to be inclusive of falsified data, failure in post-marketing, and so forth. i particularly wonder why so many miserable people taking effexor, for example, continue to do so: is the misery offset by something i am not aware? is it a cure for baldness, a fertility-enhancer, an anti-cancer drug? do tell!
here i am at home, surrounded by medical texts and references, but that is not of import: using google and a few search words (celexa and forest and home), i lucked out and am downloading the PDF-format prescribing information from Forest Laboratories, Inc., for Celexa. this is the same information in my PDR, and you can save the $58US by grabbing the information for free (from other manufacturers as well).
all of the answers in re: celexa are contained in this 16-page document just hot off the printer. it is stated that people suffering from major depression - whether taking an AD or not - may exhibit worsening of symptoms and must be monitored. things like anxiety, agitation, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility, psychomotor restlessness, and hypomania are cause (this is from the manufacturer, as are all data) to "consider changing the therapeutic regimen, including possibly discontinuing the medication in patients for whom such symptoms are severe, aprupt in onset, or were not part of the patient's presenting symptoms."
Forest states that Celexa is not approved for treating bipolar disorder. Forst states that Celexa is not to be used in pediatric populations. then, under big-font, bold letters, is the section on precautions for discontinuing Celexa. "During marketing of Celexa and other SSRIs and SNRIs, there have been spontaneous reports of adverse events occurring upon discontinuation of these drugs, particularly when abrupt, including the following: dysphoric mood, irritability, agitation, dizziness, sensory disturbances (e.g., paresthesias such as electric shock sensations), anxiety, confusion, headache, lethargy, emotional lability, insomnia, and hypomania."
i needn't repeat the almost-identical information for effexor, remeron, and (i assume) cymbalta/prozac/symbyax: it's all there, and always has been. those "brain zaps" that seemingly baffle thousands of SSRI/SNRI users are well-known and advertised - for free - as one of many awful side-effects by the very companies that market the drugs.
in addition to mattw84's excellent suggestions, might i offer some of my own observations/suggestions? why not...it's been such a long time...
(1) if you have a temporal lobe problem, i'd suspect hearing/smell oddities: motor coordination impulse/sensory control (in general) might best be found looking toward the cerebrum (frontal? substantia nigra in midbrain?) and for the eye problems - the nystagmus variations don't ring true, although what do i know - cranial nerves (say, 3, 4, and 6); and the wiring further down the way and to the rear, look at the pons/midbrain/medulla and some autonomic contributors (9?, 10?); don't bother with citalopram, as the information concerning "brain zaps" and too many other pieces of bad-voodoo is free, widely-distributed, and pushed by the very folks who make the stuff (and the same goes for effexor and any other med);
(2) if you are inclined to instigate legal action for your continued ingestion of substances that you find not to be of use for your malady, and said ingestion is not required by law nor forced upon you against your will (i.e., it is your choice, as the doctor assesses the situation and writes a prescription: you are hardly bound to take any or all of the medication), please do retain excellent counsel and forward to me the appropriate name(s): despite drinking case upon case of coors light beer, bikini-clad young women did not appear on my doorstep inviting me to a game of beach volleyball and a hot-tub afterwards. the headaches, dry-mouth, expanding gut, and malfunctioning liver are to be replaced by the brewer of the suds;
(3) if you wish further progress in the field of pharmaceutical research for formulating better drugs - keeping in mind the 20-year development process (on average, +/-, and this is before pre-clinical) and the $500,000,000US to $1,000,000,000US cost, all of which stands a great chance of being lost along the way - do not loot the very industry that requires the money to accomodate your needs. on a similar note, why support them at all? why are you putting money into the pockets of the evil producers of the drugs you rely upon to keep you in a state of misery? stop taking the meds and be done with it;
(4) it's good to be back....i've missed you all terribly....all the best, chemist
poster:chemist
thread:434074
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20041223/msgs/434572.html