![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 76 to 100 of 105. Go back in thread:
Posted by Tomatheus on September 19, 2006, at 23:46:18
In reply to Re: Here's my first and last word(s), posted by SLS on September 19, 2006, at 12:44:20
> I think these drugs work better than many of the current clinical studies indicate, and at least as well as they did 30 years ago.
I'm sure that those who experienced decades worth of remission from the "old" Nardil and have been suffering from the return of their depressive and/or anxiety symptoms since the formulation was changed would beg to differ. Even if antidepressants as a whole are more effective than they were 30 years ago, I don't think that an industry can claim progress if some patients received more benefits from the meds that were available 30 years ago than they do from the meds that are available now.
Tomatheus
Posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 4:20:22
In reply to Re: Here's my first and last word(s) » SLS, posted by Tomatheus on September 19, 2006, at 23:46:18
> > I think these drugs work better than many of the current clinical studies indicate, and at least as well as they did 30 years ago.
> I'm sure that those who experienced decades worth of remission from the "old" Nardil and have been suffering from the return of their depressive and/or anxiety symptoms since the formulation was changed would beg to differ. Even if antidepressants as a whole are more effective than they were 30 years ago, I don't think that an industry can claim progress if some patients received more benefits from the meds that were available 30 years ago than they do from the meds that are available now.You know, the funny thing is, I never thought of our new drugs as being any better than our old drugs, just sufficiently different to get some people well that had not been made well by the old drugs. I thought everyone thought the same way. I have NEVER heard one of my doctors come right out and say that our new drugs are better than our old drugs. I have had one or two point to certain drugs and deem them as being pieces of sh*t, though. I guess I have been lucky. For the past twenty years, the best the drug companies could do was to bring up from their R&D their SSRIs. That is exactly what they had in their pipelines. It was a cohort of drugs that were developed at the same time 35 year ago. What would you expect? We were lucky to get Wellbutrin, Effexor, Serzone, and Remeron. These were not me-too drugs. Give the pharmaceutical companies a break and look at the timeline. Look at the lack of breakthroughs in the understanding of mental illnesses. You can't design an elegant drug to attack a black box. If you want to complain, do so to your congressman for the lack of funds allocated to the NIMH for the researching of mental illness. It is not the responsibility of private enterprise to do this research, and it is obvious that they have not come up with the answers necessary to produce effective treatments. So, go ahead and rant against the drug companies. They refuse to make better drugs because they prefer not to make more money. Go ahead and rant against the researchers. They have no interest in learning new things and winning Nobel Prizes. Go ahead and rant against doctors. They have no moral or ethical constitutions nor monetary investments in their reputations.
No, today's drugs are no better than those of 30 years ago. Ask anyone who has been in practice or has been a patient since 1980.
We have orders of magnitude more data on what exists inside the brain than we did 30 years ago, but barely a clue as to what it all means. Basically, we are no smarter.
Who's fault is it?
Let's look for someone to blame.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 4:24:21
In reply to Re: Tonight I don't feel that antidepressants work » SLS, posted by Phillipa on September 19, 2006, at 21:51:33
> The ad's don't work for me and to me it seems if your brain wanted them or they were good for you you wouldn't have side effects. I force myself out of bed daily. And my pdoc says what do you want to try now. I'm the one paying them the money so now I have to be my own doctor too? I wont do it . I think grief is a lot of my problem and being in a strange place and all the medical things that have happened to me in a few months and being old Love Phillipa ps when I was a kid I had temper tantrums I think I've been having them for l0years and no one will stop them. Love Phillipa
You didn't answer my question.
You never do.
Why do you have to force yourself to get out of bed? What makes it so difficult?
- Scott
Posted by Jost on September 20, 2006, at 9:52:59
In reply to Re: Tonight I don't feel that antidepressants work, posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 4:24:21
The newer ADs may not be more effective, but the milder SE profile shouldn't be minimized.
For one thing, people who otherwise would have to quit, can continue; and those who would have continued, despite SEs, are more able to enjoy whatever improvements, without feeling as sluggish, emotionally flat, etc.
What it may come to, that the moment, is that for those for whom they don't work, ADs don't work. A not inconsiderable percentage of people
For those for whom one or more works, they do work. Also not an inconsiderable percentage of people.
I personally admire SLS's persistence and unwillingness to give up in the face of many treatment failures. Maybe he has the luck of a certain temperamental stubbornness and drive, or an underlying sense that there's a solution-- despite his times of hopelessness. We could all profit from that, and learn from it. Really.
But by the same token, I'm not someone of that temperament. I grew up in a family where the idea of ADs was verboten-- and it was showing weakness to take one, etc etc. And so it was hard for me even to consider taking an AD, much less going around, doing research, pushing the envelop.
So I have a lot of identification with people who believe it's all propaganda and hype. I don't agree with that-- but there certainly is propaganda and hype. It's just that the hype doesn't take away from the fact, that has been established, that the ADs do work for a lot of people.
Even if they're not great, perfect, sensitively targeted, based on the greatest science. I don't think it does a service to the many people who can be helped to talk them down--
Jost
Posted by Tomatheus on September 20, 2006, at 11:04:54
In reply to Re: Here's my first and last word(s), posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 4:20:22
> You know, the funny thing is, I never thought of our new drugs as being any better than our old drugs, just sufficiently different to get some people well that had not been made well by the old drugs. I thought everyone thought the same way. I have NEVER heard one of my doctors come right out and say that our new drugs are better than our old drugs. I have had one or two point to certain drugs and deem them as being pieces of sh*t, though. I guess I have been lucky. For the past twenty years, the best the drug companies could do was to bring up from their R&D their SSRIs. That is exactly what they had in their pipelines. It was a cohort of drugs that were developed at the same time 35 year ago. What would you expect? We were lucky to get Wellbutrin, Effexor, Serzone, and Remeron. These were not me-too drugs. Give the pharmaceutical companies a break and look at the timeline. Look at the lack of breakthroughs in the understanding of mental illnesses.
Scott,
I'm not arguing against the benefits of developing new drugs. I'm not saying that new drugs don't offer benefits over old drugs, and I'm certainly not saying that we shouldn't continue to look for new compounds that can bring relief to those who are currently suffering.
I'm not arguing that some progress in the treatment of psychiatric illnesses hasn't been made. You're right. Drugs like Wellbutrin, Effexor, Serzone, and Remeron aren't "me-too" drugs. I think it's wonderful that the pharmaceutical industry has added these innovative compounds to our arsenal of psychopharmacological treatments for depression, and yes, we are lucky to have them.
But does the fact that new drugs offer benefits over old drugs in a lot of individuals make it acceptable to discontinue an older drug that continued to be the most efficacious drug for some people despite the development of newer drugs? Does that make it acceptable to claim that a film-coated version of a compound is bioequivalent to its enteric-coated version, despite the fact that empirical data show that the compound in question undergoes significant chemical degradation in stomach-like conditions but not in gut-like conditions? Does that make it acceptable for the acting director of the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research to assert that a pharmaceutical company's report with glaring statistical flaws can provide a "sound scientific basis" for the approval of a reformulated drug? Does that make it acceptable for a pharmaceutical company to claim that a drug formulation's dissolution and disintegration properties were poor without offering any empirical data to back up such a claim? Does that make it acceptable to add an ingredient to a drug formulation and to refer to this ingredient as being "inactive," desipte the fact that its known effects include back pain; bloody urine; cloudy urine; fever; chills; increased thirst; irregular heartbeat; lightheadedness; fainting spells; muscle rigidity; muscle cramps and pain; numbness and tingling in the hands and/or feet; pain and/or difficulty producing urine, and/or an urgent need to pass urine; seizures; skin rash; unusual tiredness and/or weakness; diarrhea; headache; loss of appetite; nausea; vomiting; and stomach pain? Does that make it acceptable for a pharmaceutical company to dismiss the complaints of patients experiencing some of the above side effects from the new formulation of a drug (which happens to contain the "inactive" ingredient that I referred to in the previous sentence) but not the old formulation of the same drug (which does not contain the ingredient referred to in the previous sentence) as a "placebo effect," despite the fact that no study has ever evaluated the side effects of the drug's new formulation in individuals taking more than a single dose of the drug? Does that make it acceptable for a pharmaceutical company to dismiss patient complaints about the effectiveness of the drug's new formulation as a "placebo effect," despite the fact that the effectiveness of the drug's new formulation has never been compared with with that of the drug's old formulation in a scientific study?
I don't doubt that there are a lot of psychiatric patients who benefit from newer drugs in a way that's far superior to the way that they could have benefited from older drugs. I don't even doubt that these patients are in the majority, and I'm in no way contesting the expertise of experienced psychiatrists who can attest to the benefits of newer drugs. However, I think that it's absolutely disgusting and immoral to claim that we've made nothing but progress in the treatment of psychiatric disorders when we have patients suffering today who were helped by the drugs that were available 30 years ago. Is a person's life a waste just because that person happens to be in the minority?
> Go ahead and rant against the researchers. They have no interest in learning new things and winning Nobel Prizes. Go ahead and rant against doctors. They have no moral or ethical constitutions nor monetary investments in their reputations.
I am confused by these statements. Are you accusing me of having ranted against researchers and/or doctors, or are you encouraging me to do so?
Tomatheus
Posted by Phillipa on September 20, 2006, at 19:49:08
In reply to Re: Here's my first and last word(s), posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 4:20:22
Scott my first panic attack was at age 24. All they had for me at least that's what the doc's said was valium and meprobomate which I took and as my life improved I did too. But I was young then with lots to look forward to. I think this has a lot to do with whether drugs work or not. Now that I'm old have had a career, kids, grandchildren, traveled the world and Caribbean there is nothing to look forward to except more physical illness. I wonder if you were that young when you started on meds if it's like Link says and it did something to your brain. I don't know I'm not smart like you. Just think way too much. Love Phillipa
Posted by Phillipa on September 20, 2006, at 19:59:17
In reply to Re: Tonight I don't feel that antidepressants work, posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 4:24:21
Because I have no money, no place to go, nothing I need, and no one that wants to share getting older as my husband is l3 years younger than me and can do so much more and doesn't understand why I am not money hungry like he is. I've paid my dues. I should have stayed with my cheating first husband, father of my kids, knew him from age l6. By now he wouldn't be cheating as he's aging too. Love Phillipa
Posted by johnnyj on September 20, 2006, at 20:32:40
In reply to Re: One comment, one question...ERP is a, posted by fca on September 19, 2006, at 18:57:50
Thank you for your information and great explanations. I have had the Pure-O in different degrees for 20 years but was only recently dx correctly. My biggest fear was that I was going to go crazy and hurt a loved one. It was the worst feeling imaginable. The thing is it is so opposite of me it really had me scared. I lived with this and told no one for years and it actually abated when my anxiety would(that should have been a clue).
I was on remeron for 3 years and it acutally made some things worse and some better(sleep). I have been off and AD for 4 months and am having problems again, but I did some ERP on my own and things are ok now, but my sleep is still really bad and anxiety at times. Acutally, I am sort of numb a lot of the time.
ERP is kind of scary. I don't want to make up details of me going crazy and hurting some one. I am doing CBT but part of me knows I should do more ERP but don't really want to go there. I am considering luvox and klonopin which is what my pdoc has prescribe but with my bad experience with remeron I am leary. Life could be better but I am afraid of drugs. I have some decisions. Did paxil help with the ocd? Thank you for your kind response.
johnnyj
Posted by johnnyj on September 20, 2006, at 20:36:33
In reply to Re: Here's my first and last word(s), posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 4:20:22
The makers of remeron didn't do me any favors. I can't imagine a drug with worse side effects. That drug screwed with my mind. But, everyone is different I suppose.
johnnyj
Posted by Jost on September 20, 2006, at 20:38:08
In reply to Re: Tonight I don't feel that antidepressants work » SLS, posted by Phillipa on September 20, 2006, at 19:59:17
Phillipa, I'm sad to hear you say these things about yourself. I really wonder, isn't it possible you're seeing and experiencing things through the dark mood of depression, rather than how things necessarily have to be?
Some of these thoughts and feelings could be negative beliefs, couldn't they? Beliefs that could be subject to change, if you felt better, more hopeful-- and could get in touch with more hopeful and good possiblities--don't you think that's possible?
Because I really do find it hard to believe your severe self-criticisms-- you seem so kind and generous in spirit. You have so much to offer. Your husband must have seen that when he married you-- qualities that are still there? Aren't they? Maybe? only maybe they're lost for the moment, to your awareness--under this blanket of doubt and sadness and self-reproach?
Jost
Posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 21:13:48
In reply to Re: Here's my first and last word(s) » SLS, posted by Tomatheus on September 20, 2006, at 11:04:54
Hi Tomatheus.
> I'm not arguing that some progress in the treatment of psychiatric illnesses hasn't been made. You're right. Drugs like Wellbutrin, Effexor, Serzone, and Remeron aren't "me-too" drugs. I think it's wonderful that the pharmaceutical industry has added these innovative compounds to our arsenal of psychopharmacological treatments for depression, and yes, we are lucky to have them.
We are also lucky to have the me-too drugs. They are not me-me drugs. People respond to Zoloft who don't respond to Prozac and vice-versa.
> But does the fact that new drugs offer benefits over old drugs in a lot of individuals make it acceptable to discontinue an older drug that continued to be the most efficacious drug for some people despite the development of newer drugs?
Heck, no.
> Does that make it acceptable to claim that a film-coated version of a compound is bioequivalent to its enteric-coated version,
It is not acceptable if it indeed is not.
<large amount of important text excised>
I am soon going to ask to be placed on this mystery compound, and I am not happy to learn all of this.
> > So, go ahead and rant against the drug companies. They refuse to make better drugs because they prefer not to make more money. Go ahead and rant against the researchers. They have no interest in learning new things and winning Nobel Prizes. Go ahead and rant against doctors. They have no moral or ethical constitutions nor monetary investments in their reputations.
> I am confused by these statements. Are you accusing me of having ranted against researchers and/or doctors, or are you encouraging me to do so?No. Neither. I apologize. That was obviously a rant of my own that was not meant to be directed at you personally. I'm sorry that you got caught in the cross-hairs.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 21:18:50
In reply to Re: Here's my first and last word(s) » SLS, posted by Tomatheus on September 20, 2006, at 11:04:54
> Does that make it acceptable to add an ingredient to a drug formulation and to refer to this ingredient as being "inactive," desipte the fact that its known effects include...
By the way, what is this ingredient that I will be depositing into my belly?
Thanks.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 21:32:05
In reply to Re: Tonight I don't feel that antidepressants work » SLS, posted by Phillipa on September 20, 2006, at 19:59:17
> Because I have no money, no place to go, nothing I need, and no one that wants to share getting older as my husband is l3 years younger than me and can do so much more and doesn't understand why I am not money hungry like he is. I've paid my dues. I should have stayed with my cheating first husband, father of my kids, knew him from age l6. By now he wouldn't be cheating as he's aging too. Love Phillipa
I don't participate on the other boards, so I don't know how often you share as much as you have here in these last two posts.
That's a lot of non-biological stuff going on there, Jan. It sounds to me as if it would indicate non-biological professional support.
What do you think?
Another question:
What does depression actually feel like to you?
- Scott
Posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 21:44:41
In reply to Re: Tonight I don't feel that antidepressants work » SLS, posted by Phillipa on September 20, 2006, at 19:59:17
I think it is important to understand what Jost has said about depression. It is a liar. It colors your perceptions of the world and your place in it. However, there is some real content there - real issues, regardless of whether your depression is biological or psychological or a product of the two feeding off of each other. You would be an excellent candidate for CBT (cognitive behavioral therapy), I think. It helps people with and without biological depressions. It helps one to unlearn the negative messages that life has taught them and untangle the distortions that depression can produce.
- Scott
Posted by Phillipa on September 20, 2006, at 22:01:34
In reply to Re: Tonight I don't feel that antidepressants work » Phillipa, posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 21:44:41
Scott I know you're right and so is Jost. Where does this fear come from? Heck I can't even make a phone call, pick up a library book, not that I can concentrate and I don't want to die. I'm also afraid of that and think of it constantly. Everywhere I look people are younger than me. And I used to get men looking all the time. I have no selfesteem . Even the guy who owns the place where greg is painting self-employed on boats said you have a scowl and you're angry. And I wasn't it's just something I can do nothing about as a long furrow between my eyes across my nose. Hence the botox Thread. I even had a plastic surgeon tell me he could do nothing. Today I confronted him as told him I hadn't been angry and he hurt my feelings by saying I looked mad. He didn't acklowledge my feelings just told me to get laid seriously. And that hurt a whole lot. Gotta go I'm crying, can't find a therapist I click with the one I did worked in the hospital and had no suggestions. I've searched for l0 years for one and I find one and she moves. I don't know what to do. Greg even says I cuss him in the middle of the night. I want him to fix things. I have to accept my age him working and I Cant!!!!!!! Love Phillipa
Posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 23:43:46
In reply to Re: Tonight I don't feel that antidepressants work » SLS, posted by Phillipa on September 20, 2006, at 22:01:34
Cry, babe, cry.
I think this one is good for you.
If you don't already, why don't you share some of this stuff on Psychology or Social? But only do it if you feel safe there. Only do it if you see that other people feel safe there. I think it is safe here. Maybe it is safe there too.
You can buy a book on CBT. They have workbooks you can process at home and practice with. Ask about them on Psychology. My dear Jan, you have too great a wealth of mind, heart, and soul inside you not to invest in clearing away the trash and allowing yourself to enjoy yourself and the world around you.
Now...
> Where does this fear come from?
I'm not sure.
> Heck I can't even make a phone call, pick up a library book,
Is it fear or inhibition?
Do only certain situations bring on anxiety or is the anxiety there all of the time?
> not that I can concentrate
Do you have difficulties concentrating when you read?
Is concentration difficult only when there is anxiety?
Do you have difficulties with your memory? If so, can you describe some examples?
> and I don't want to die.
I'm just a little confused here. Do you want to die?
> I'm also afraid of that and think of it constantly.
Are you afraid to die as you age, or are you afraid that you might commit suicide?
> Everywhere I look people are younger than me.
This is something that you must find peace with. In the meantime, it might help you to look around and see people who are older too.
> And I used to get men looking all the time.
Hey! Me too! And women. I used to be a head-turner on both sides of the fence. Glory days.
> I have no selfesteem.
This is something that you will not find in a pill alone. I would loan you some of mine, but I am rather short on it myself. If you have a biological depression, your self-esteem will inevitably suffer. Once you find the right pill, it does not inevitably return - you have to do the work to clean up the mess.
> Even the guy who owns the place where greg is painting self-employed on boats said you have a scowl and you're angry.
Yes. Depression changes one's countenance - the contraction of facial muscles. It changes our posture. It changes our muscle-tone. It changes our bowel function. It changes so many psychological and physiological functions, it is hard to imagine one illness being responsible for so much disturbance to one's being.
> And I wasn't it's just something I can do nothing about as a long furrow between my eyes across my nose. Hence the botox Thread. I even had a plastic surgeon tell me he could do nothing.
That's ok. You'll pretty up fine once we get you smiling again.
> Today I confronted him as told him I hadn't been angry and he hurt my feelings by saying I looked mad. He didn't acklowledge my feelings just told me to get laid seriously. And that hurt a whole lot.
Some people do not respond well to "I" statements. They either feel uncomfortable or simply don't give a damn. This is usually a reflection of their shortcomings in my estimation. It is certainly not a sign of strength. Can you imagine the lack of self-esteem a man must have to say such a thing to a woman? You just continue to be honest with yourself and ask for help from those who are in a position to give it. Everything else will fall into place. Remember, your husband might not be in such a position right now. If you ask him for it, he might just pull away. Cruel reality.
What will your insurance pay for?
- Scott
Posted by SLS on September 21, 2006, at 5:49:12
In reply to Re: Here's my first and last word(s) » SLS, posted by johnnyj on September 20, 2006, at 20:36:33
> The makers of remeron didn't do me any favors. I can't imagine a drug with worse side effects. That drug screwed with my mind.
I know it did.
You know, sometimes the effects of these drugs have on your mind sneak up on you in a way that you don't notice until you discontinue them. Then you realize that they somehow robbed you of yourself.
Then, on the other hand, the right drug can give you back the you that you hadn't realize you lost to depression.
- Scott
Posted by Tomatheus on September 21, 2006, at 9:19:30
In reply to Re: Here's my first and last word(s), posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 21:13:48
Scott,
See below for my responses to different sections of your post.
Tomatheus
> We are also lucky to have the me-too drugs. They are not me-me drugs. People respond to Zoloft who don't respond to Prozac and vice-versa.
I think you're right. A true "me-too" drug is one that offers absolutely zero benefits over existing drugs, and so I don't think it's fair to put all of the SSRIs that have come out since Prozac into this category. As you mentioned, there are people who respond to one SSRI but not others, and the SSRIs do vary to some extent in terms of side effects, which gives people with different needs and different comorbid medical conditions more options. The percentage of patients with major depressive disorder who would respond to one SSRI but not one or more of the others is probably rather small (my guess is that it would be in the single digits for any given drug), but as I alluded to in my previous post, the lives of these individuals are no less valuable than those of individuals who are part of a larger minority. Patients who respond uniquely to one SSRI over the others should not be blamed for the fact that some drug companies have apparently decided to forego research on drugs with more novel mechanisms that might benefit individuals with illnesses that statistically show a greater rate of morbidity than MDD. The drug companies could very easily reallocate funds from their marketing and administration budgets or their profits (I know that this isn't likely, but they can do it, and they would if they were true to their word about caring about patients) to the R&D of these highly innovative drugs. So, I question the accuracy of claims that R&D spending on new drugs with similar mechanisms of action as older ones is actually preventing the drug companies from spending the needed dollars on more "innovative" drugs.
> I am soon going to ask to be placed on this mystery compound, and I am not happy to learn all of this.
I'm sorry that I've had to place myself in the position of being the bearer of bad news, in a manner of speaking. I have personally spent a tremendous amount of time researching the Nardil formulation change, and there is little question in my mind that a large majority of veteran responders and probable responders (e.g., those with atypical depression, social anxiety disorder, and/or panic disorder) to the "old" Nardil would have reported the new version as being markedly less effective and less tolerable than the old version if a controlled, randomized study of the two formulations had been conducted. Given the anecdotal reports from veteran "old" responders on the new formulation's reduced effectiveness and facts such as those that I referenced in my previous post, I think that the available evidence strongly points to the likelihood that the "new" Nardil's clinical profile is dramatically different from that of the "old" Nardil. I absolutely hate having to say this, but I wouldn't be claiming with such certainty that the "new" Nardil is clearly less effective and less tolerable than the "old" Nardil if I didn't have overwhelmingly strong evidence to support my assertion.
Having said what I've said, I don't think that the "new" Nardil is completely devoid of therapeutic value in everybody, and I don't think that individuals with treatment-resistant mood and/or anxiety disorders should overlook its potential benefits just because it isn't the "old" Nardil. It is my impression based on posts that I've read on this board and other Internet forums that it is virtually unheard of to respond to the "new" Nardil as monotherapy, but may be possible to respond to the drug as part of a polypharmacological drug cocktail. It is absolutely conceivable that the meds that you're currently taking might work synergistically with the "new" Nardil, so I don't think that the "new" Nardil's reduced effectiveness and tolerability compared with the old formulation is reason to abandon hope that the "new" Nardil might be part of an effective medication strategy. As discouraging as it may seem (probably eliminating any placebo effect that you might have otherwise experienced from taking the "new" Nardil), I think it's important to understand the reality that Nardil isn't what it used to be so you won't be too surprised if, for example, you end up sweating a lot more than you did on the "old" Nardil or start developing back pains at 75 mg of the drug. Besides, I think that if you were a placebo responder, you would have found that out a long time ago.
> No. Neither. I apologize. That was obviously a rant of my own that was not meant to be directed at you personally. I'm sorry that you got caught in the cross-hairs.
Thanks, Scott. I accept your apology. I understand that it's sometimes easy to get carried away when it comes to discussing issues that you feel strongly about because I've been guilty of doing the same thing myself. Despite the fact that I chose to express my disagreement with one aspect of something that you wrote, I actually agree with a vast majority of what you've written on Psycho-Babble, which is part of the reason why I don't typically have much to say in response to your posts (that and the fact that the psychomotor retardation that I experience is sometimes so severe that it makes it next to impossible to compose a coherent post). I've actually learned a lot from reading your posts, and I truly appreciate the work that you do here.
Tomatheus
Posted by Tomatheus on September 21, 2006, at 9:22:19
In reply to Re: Here's my first and last word(s) Above For » Tomatheus, posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 21:18:50
> By the way, what is this ingredient that I will be depositing into my belly?
Edetate disodium.
I'll post another message to this thread with more info related to edetate disodium later in the day, probably in the evening.
Thanks,
Tomatheus
Posted by SLS on September 21, 2006, at 11:18:19
In reply to The mysterious 'inactive' ingredient in Nardil » SLS, posted by Tomatheus on September 21, 2006, at 9:22:19
> > By the way, what is this ingredient that I will be depositing into my belly?
>
> Edetate disodium.
>
> I'll post another message to this thread with more info related to edetate disodium later in the day, probably in the evening.
>
> Thanks,No. Thank *you*
- Scott
Posted by johnnyj on September 21, 2006, at 11:56:37
In reply to Re: Here's my first and last word(s) » johnnyj, posted by SLS on September 21, 2006, at 5:49:12
So very true Scott, so very true. After I was off remeron I was almost shocked at how much I appeared to have lost.
Strange things is at 7,5 mg it was terrible. When I weaned down to 3.75 I had withdrawal for 3 weeks and then felt much better. So, I often wonder if the 3.75 was a good dose. So, small, but I am very med sensitive. I guess if I start an ssri I need to start low and see what happens. Nothing like cutting the smallest doesed in quarters! I found some reading that said there are people like me with ocd that respond to very small doses when large ones don't help. Interesting. Today hasn't been good really spacey.
Posted by yxibow on September 21, 2006, at 19:54:19
In reply to The mysterious 'inactive' ingredient in Nardil » SLS, posted by Tomatheus on September 21, 2006, at 9:22:19
> > By the way, what is this ingredient that I will be depositing into my belly?
>
> Edetate disodium.
>
> I'll post another message to this thread with more info related to edetate disodium later in the day, probably in the evening.
>
> Thanks,
> TomatheusYou can read all about FDA regulated substances including all EDTA compounds
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/opa-appa.html
I sense a chelation therapy argument...
EDTA is used as a preservative at the levels in medication and is inactive as a substance on the body.
Posted by Tomatheus on September 21, 2006, at 20:25:36
In reply to Re: The mysterious 'inactive' ingredient in Nardil, posted by SLS on September 21, 2006, at 11:18:19
Scott,
My mind just isn't with it tonight. That "muddiness" that you sometimes speak of has hit me hard. I'll post a reply on this topic here soon (hopefully tomorrow), though.
Tomatheus
> > > By the way, what is this ingredient that I will be depositing into my belly?
> >
> > Edetate disodium.
> >
> > I'll post another message to this thread with more info related to edetate disodium later in the day, probably in the evening.
> >
> > Thanks,
>
> No. Thank *you*
>
>
> - Scott
Posted by Phillipa on September 21, 2006, at 20:36:15
In reply to Re: Tonight I don't feel that antidepressants work » Phillipa, posted by SLS on September 20, 2006, at 23:43:46
Scott thanks. So crying is okay? I have a lifetime of things to grieve that I used my defense mechanisms to cover up til they failed. Guess they were overworked. To answer the questions I remember yes the anxiety is usually there in the form of bordom or not wanting to be alone. I did take a big step for me today and pick up a libarary book. I only read in bed before sleep with Greg. It's kind of relaxing. And I had lasix on my eyes and that was for distance and don't bring glasses with me. I concentrate on things I like. And no I'm not suicidal afraid of aging and dying. And not able to do the things I used to do like run because of disc problems. It seems like the older I get everything leads to more medical problems. I promised myself I would never get sick as my Mother was sick my whole life and I mothered myself. I've tried various social workers as therapists but they don't want to look at the past. Only at what's ahead. But my problems are in my past. I'm so lonely and really don't want real life friends they scare me don't know why. Thanks for caring. Love Jan see I rush out of here as soon as I can to get to Greg and my perception of safety as soon as I can. Not many social workers take medicaire but medical services are fine.
Posted by Dr. Bob on September 21, 2006, at 21:48:46
In reply to Re: Tonight I don't feel that antidepressants work, posted by linkadge on September 19, 2006, at 7:47:14
> [xxx] says it best
I know it may not be what you intended, but please remember not to use this site to exchange information (such as web pages with links to online pharmacies) that could be used to import into the US prescription medication without a prescription.
But please don't take this personally, this doesn't mean I don't like you or think you're a bad person.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please first see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#illegal
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforceFollow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration.
Thanks,
Bob
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.