Shown: posts 1 to 8 of 8. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by BRC on June 12, 2004, at 9:32:11
Chemist, I want to thank you for replying to my post about ocd medications. You stated that you tried Luvox and had success. I was started on Luvox years ago, but had to change pdoc due to insurance reasons and my meds were changed. I was under the impression that Luvox an SSRI targets serotonin in the same way the Lexapro I am currently taking. So how come the Luvox would target obssessive thoughts and Lexapro doesn't
Also do you think that Luvox would be superior in anti-obssessional capabilities compared with the older med Anafranil. Thanks again for beign so helpful and sorry about so many questions :).
Posted by Racer on June 12, 2004, at 12:38:33
In reply to To Chemist from BRC!!, posted by BRC on June 12, 2004, at 9:32:11
I can offer an answer to part of that question, even if it is not THE answer to it.
Why Luvox is marketed as an anti-obsessional agent, rather than an anti-depressant is because it is about marketing. Pharmaceutical companies are For Profit enterprises, no matter how much good their products may do. There are how many SSRIs available now? Sure, there are differences between them, in terms of their side effect profiles, auxilliary effects, who responds to which, etc, but they're basically all Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors. Bringing out a new one that really can't stand out in the crowd is not worthwhile from a business perspective. Calling a new SSRI an anti-obsessional agent, though, does make it stand out. Some of the other SSRIs are also considered to be quite good for obsessional thoughts, and it's even listed in some of the drug info packets as an auxilliary use for the drug. If Luvox has been found to be better than the other SSRIs for obsessionality, and not significantly better for depression, the marketing guys are going to run grinning into the board room and say, "Hey! Guess what! If you test this as an obsessional agent rather than an antidepressant, we can market it that way and REALLY CLEAN UP! Ain't that great!"
So, maybe the Luvox isn't really any better than the Lexapro -- my guess is that it really is better than Lexapro for obsessions -- but it does fill a different niche in marketing strategy and in chemical profile. I 'spect chemist will give you the chemical differences, with a good explanation, but there's the Bidness view.
Posted by chemist on June 12, 2004, at 18:47:47
In reply to To Chemist from BRC!!, posted by BRC on June 12, 2004, at 9:32:11
> Chemist, I want to thank you for replying to my post about ocd medications. You stated that you tried Luvox and had success. I was started on Luvox years ago, but had to change pdoc due to insurance reasons and my meds were changed. I was under the impression that Luvox an SSRI targets serotonin in the same way the Lexapro I am currently taking. So how come the Luvox would target obssessive thoughts and Lexapro doesn't
>
> Also do you think that Luvox would be superior in anti-obssessional capabilities compared with the older med Anafranil. Thanks again for beign so helpful and sorry about so many questions :).hi BRC....Racer's comments are likely right-on. Strattera, a useless drug except for the placebo effect, is marketed by Lilly for ADHD after it failed in clinical trials as an anti-depressant. Lilly has also pulled a major-league fast-one with Serafem, including introducing PMDD (premenstrual dysphoricdisorder) into our vocabulary. When the patent for Prozac expired, they simply marketed it *again* under a new patent under the name Serafem. if you have a PDR handy, you'll find that it is not listed in the Lilly section, but that of Warner Chilcott, a distributor of meds for Lilly, BMS, and others. and the Serafem capsules are in ``women'' colors, purple pink and lavender, and they are stamped with the name Lilly. now, if doctors and patients had any knowledge of this, they'd write a script for generic fluoxetine and tell the patient to take half or a tablet or what have you. but i digress. i think both luvox and lexapro are probably on-par with OCD. luvoxdoes have some nice anti-anxiety qualities i like, so reduced need for benzos. as for anafranil, it gets high marks on this board, although i have never taken it. i suggest you direct a post for Panda, i recall we had a back-and-forth about this one not long ago......all the best, chemist
Posted by BRC on June 12, 2004, at 20:30:43
In reply to Re: To Chemist from BRC!! » BRC, posted by chemist on June 12, 2004, at 18:47:47
First of all I want to say that Chemist I wish I had your "knowledge". It is good to have someone like you that knows so much that doctors don't have a clue about and most can't explain if you ask them. I truly thank you for your response to my post and your insight. Your helping alot of people. Thanks.
To RACER I agree with you 100% about the marketing strategies from drug companies that lure doctor's to their wonder drugs by whining and dining them and giving them all the free samples they want to get patients to take their products. I was a Business major in college and I know the marketing strategies. For example--The anitdepressant Remeron has recently came out with sol-tabs (which dissolve on the tongue without water) because their patent ran out and the drug came available in generic. Xananx came out with Xanax extended release to spark brand name sales because the drug had went to generic. Klonopin came out with Klonopin wafers (which dissolve on the tongue) to extend their patent because their drug went to generic. So you are exactly right and I agree that drug companies are a money making industry and they will do what it takes to turn a profit just like any other business. Thanks for the response
Posted by BRC on June 12, 2004, at 20:54:23
In reply to Re: Thanks to Chemist and Racer!!, posted by BRC on June 12, 2004, at 20:30:43
When posting how do you get the person's name to appear at the end of the subject line. Ex. "I have a question >>John Doe". For the >> symbols I used the greater than less than keys on my keyboard but I know thats not how you do it. What am I overlooking or doing wrong. Thanks in advance.
Posted by snapper on June 12, 2004, at 21:03:10
In reply to Re: Have a computer question for Chemist or Racer!, posted by BRC on June 12, 2004, at 20:54:23
I'm not chemist or racer but have an answer for you. On the page that you use to 'post'...look right below the subject line and check the 'add name of poster, box'
hope that helps
snapper
Posted by chemist on June 12, 2004, at 21:05:14
In reply to Re: Have a computer question for Chemist or Racer!, posted by BRC on June 12, 2004, at 20:54:23
> When posting how do you get the person's name to appear at the end of the subject line. Ex. "I have a question >>John Doe". For the >> symbols I used the greater than less than keys on my keyboard but I know thats not how you do it. What am I overlooking or doing wrong. Thanks in advance.
well, that's how i do it. also click on the box that says ``add name of previous poster.'' but p-erhaps i'm all wrong, too! hope this helps, chemist
Posted by chemist on June 12, 2004, at 21:06:13
In reply to Re: Have a computer question for Chemist or Racer! » BRC, posted by snapper on June 12, 2004, at 21:03:10
This is the end of the 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.