Posted by med_empowered on November 7, 2005, at 0:36:43
In reply to Re: Is perphenazine anything like zyprexa » med_empowered, posted by Phillipa on November 6, 2005, at 21:37:30
hey phillipa! I don't know where exactly this whole atypicals for everything idea came from. Drug companies I'm sure had a lot to do with it...it seems that shrinks are particularly easy to influence with drug company money, and the FDA panels regulating drugs like antidepressants are often filled with docs with undisclosed financial ties to Big Pharma. That said...if you look back to when Thorazine and other antipsychotics were first introduced, they did similar stuff. I mean, they also prescribed barbs, miltown, and later benzos, but Thorazine and other drugs were initially viewed primarily as **tranquilizers**, hence the term "major tranquilizers". Early ads for Thorazine and Trilafon, etc. often talk about using them in "anxious, agitated" patients, without mentioning schizophrenia or psychosis specifically. They also combined antipsychotics with antidepressants (ex: Triavil), stimulants (Thora-Dex..Thorazine plus dexedrine; it was also common to give patients Ritalin plus Thorazine, to counter the thorazine sedation), and sedatives (I forget what it was called, but there was a barbiturate-antipsychotic combo pill for a while). It really wasn't until the mid-to-late 60s that the "tranquilizers" became considered "antipsychotics"...even after then, it seems like antipsychotics were sprayed around for **EVERYTHING** (most disturbingly, they were used on children for "conduct disorder," often in foster homes and other institutions).
It really wasn't until TD became a **big** deal (primarily b/c of costly litigation, not just research) that shrinks calmed down with the antipsychotics. Benzos were widely prescribed in the 60s-70s, but so were antipsychotics; afterwards, there was a dip in the use of benzos (followed by a rise in the use of antidepressants) and a smaller dip in the use of antipsychotics. Now..the atypicals are everywhere. Part of it I think is money; the drugs are new, expensive, and pushed by money-filled drug companies. Seroquel, for instance, is extremely popular "off-label"; I read that about 50% of seroquel RXs appear to be written off-label, primarily for sleep purposes (Seroquel is sedating b/c of its anti-histamine action; most people could take some benadryl and get similar results). With all the lasting ignorance about benzos (even among shrinks, who really should know better), the rising tide against antidepressants (they really aren't that great), and psychiatry's tendency to dump drugs and pick up new, shiny ones with exuberance, it makes sense that the atypicals are being RX'd like mad.
Frighteningly enough, you see docs recommending atypicals just like they did the old drugs back in the day. Anxiety, depression...even scarier, they're being used for control; kids with "conduct disorder" and ADHD are now being given atypicals. Sure, they "work"..if you want a docile, drugged-out zombie of a kid. One study I read referred to atypicals as "potential broad-spectrum psychiatric agents", basically meaning "they're good for ANYTHING!" And think about: only an overpaid doc who wasn't **experiencing** the same problems as a patient could think that. Give someone, anyone, enough Haldol or Thorazine and of course they'll seem "improved"; they're too docile, dumbed-down and sedated to exhibit any sort of "psychiatric problem". Does this improve their overall quality of life? NO.
I don't know what to say about getting good treatment in psychiatry...it seems that there's a pattern; treatment comes along, its used widely for 10, 15, 20 years. Then people start to complain, there's data that shows problems...luckily, something new comes along which is whole-heartedly embraced, and the cycle begins anew. Look at...lobotomy, electroshock, Thorazine, barbiturates, valium, Prozac...on and on it goes.
poster:med_empowered
thread:575976
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20051106/msgs/576248.html