![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 13 to 37 of 37. Go back in thread:
Posted by 1980Monroe on July 5, 2004, at 22:59:15
In reply to Re: this article scares me » linkadge, posted by Emme on July 5, 2004, at 21:04:59
Maybe the author the article is a Scientologist yes frying of the brain sounds like a one of there toxic free programs, thats there main goal is to stop medication, and apply hubbard's dianetics. But still, thats scare's me, i may need to get off dexedrine. I take dexedrine, but now im scared ill regret it in 10 years, my goodness i hope i dont have a panic attack over this.... oh well, i overreact to things so ill be fine.
I wished we could actually test this with someone who has been prescribed a tryi. or MAOI over the past 20 years and see, OH and i need to see people who have been on dexedine for 20 years and see if there damage done for my own sake!!!!
Anyways, well i know that L-Tyrosine may be a good alternative if i am going to get off my medication, but god, my life is CHAOS without dexedrine but i guess i need to cope with it,
I'm going to get an appointment with a hypnotherapist and start a ADD session to help get off medication.
Posted by SLS on July 5, 2004, at 23:10:32
In reply to Re: this article scares me, posted by linkadge on July 5, 2004, at 16:52:13
For what it's worth, Linkadge, I find this article to be absolute garbage. I wish I had the mental energy to pick it apart line by line for you, but I'm afraid I would fry my brain in the process. :-) It's just not worth it. I'll leave that to others. Don't be scared - at least not because of *this* article. I swear to you.
I'm sorry. I know a forum like this deserves a better contribution than this one, but I wouldn't know where to start. Besides, The Simpsons is on TV right now, and it contains plenty more of life's important truths than does this article. Plus it makes me smile, so I'm going to watch it and keep taking my meds.
Emme gave things a good start.
- Scott
Posted by Iansf on July 5, 2004, at 23:18:16
In reply to Re: this article scares me, posted by linkadge on July 5, 2004, at 16:52:13
> http://www.immunesupport.com/library/bulletinarticle.cfm?ID=3618
>
> I don't know what to make of this article
>
> LinkadgeIf you go to the sites of clinics that do brain spectrum studies, you'll find exactly the opposite message: taking appropriate medication actually re-establishes a healthy brain. Google the Amen Clinic for one example of this point of view.
Also think about it in terms of personal experience: when does it seem to you that your brain is most healthy? When you're suffering from depression or mania or whatever your particular problem is, or when you're taking effective medication (and I emphasize effective)? For me, there's no doubt that my brain functions better on medication. I've been taking antidepressants for close to 15 years now, and I certainly don't see any indication of deteriorating brain state. If antidepressants do indeed fry my brain cells, surely there would be some sign of it by now. I think the article is just another attempt at scare-mongering by someone with a particular axe to grind.
Posted by Viridis on July 6, 2004, at 1:00:04
In reply to this article scares me, posted by linkadge on July 5, 2004, at 16:51:31
This seems to contradict recent evidence that severe depression is associated with loss of brain cells (especially in the hippocampus), and that some antidepressants actually seem to stimulate brain cell growth. This may be why so many take weeks to work, even though their effects on neurotransmitter levels/localization begin much more quickly.
I'm not sure what to make of it, but I'd want to know much more about the studies, methodology, doses involved, etc. This just sounds too much like propaganda to me. People certainly have been taking these meds (especially stimulants!) for long enough that if this kind of brain damage were a widespread phenomenon at normal doses, surely we'd be hearing more in the medical journals and mainstream press.
Posted by Tepiaca on July 6, 2004, at 1:41:03
In reply to Re: this article scares me, posted by linkadge on July 5, 2004, at 16:52:13
I can´t deny I got scared when I started reading the article
Nevertheless , I feel relief when I got to read"Cheney strongly urges anyone taking antidepressants or stimulants to read Glenmullen's book, which lists safe alternatives to SSRIs."
I don´t know if this is true but as long there is no approved information on this issue, this
will be a piece of garbage to me too . I think there is someone who wants to increase his sells
It´s amazing how some people can play with the health and life of someone else . This is what most worried me after reading the article
Posted by KaraS on July 6, 2004, at 2:40:44
In reply to Re: this article scares me, posted by Tepiaca on July 6, 2004, at 1:41:03
Excellent points about the brain cell growth in the hippocampus from antidepressants and Dr. Amen's brain scans that prove it! I hadn't even thought of that when I read the article. Of course I was too scared to think straight - but that was the point, wasn't it?
I have read on this site about some people taking NAC which produces glutathion in the brain in order to counteract glutamate/neurotoxicity from stimulants. I've also read about people using selegiline for the purpose of preventing neurotoxicity regardless of whether they were taking any SSRI antidepressants. Perhaps what the author is describing is something that occurs naturally anyway in our brains. But even if it does, the antidepressants must be producing new cell growth at a faster rate than those that are dying, otherwise how else to account for those brain scans?
Posted by Simcha on July 6, 2004, at 2:40:57
In reply to Re: this article scares me, posted by Tepiaca on July 6, 2004, at 1:41:03
OK, now take a look at this article:
http://www.immunesupport.com/library/showarticle.cfm/id/3154This goon is extoling the protective qualties of klonpin and neurontin. He seems to contadict doctors that say that klonopin can disrupt stage 4 sleep. He argues that Klonopin puts the brain in a healing state. He even says that Klonopin is not addictive for anyone ever.
Now, he says all of these things extoling the virtues of Klonopin without presenting any studies, data, or findings that would support his thesis.
So, now maybe I should run back to my pdoc and ask him to dump the SSRIs and give me loads of Klonopin and that might do it? Geez, this guy's a doctor? Methinks man speaks with forked tongue. I'm not buying any of his liver tonic made from snake oil.
Simcha
Posted by gardenergirl on July 6, 2004, at 7:49:14
In reply to Re: this article scares me, posted by Simcha on July 6, 2004, at 2:40:57
It is interesting that something is being sold on this site ("your purchase helps fund research" on the left lower part of the screen). Also, there is no disclosure notification. Perhaps this Dr. is affiliated with certain drug manufacturers. Even if he is not, a professional article would have a disclosure statement even if there is "nothing to disclose".
So, I agree with the ideas expressed that this writer has an agenda and is not presenting a fair and balanced assessment.
Regards,
gg
Posted by Bill LL on July 6, 2004, at 8:39:06
In reply to Re: this article scares me, posted by linkadge on July 5, 2004, at 16:52:13
Dr. Glenmullen's monkey brain pictures are very misleading. Many depresssed humans have a smaller than normal hippocampus (a part of the brain). In human brains, SSRI's have been shown to increase the size of the hippocampus to a normal size in some depressed patients.
In my own humble opinion, the guy is way off base with his speculations which are primarily motivated by his desire for profits from his book sales.
Here are 2 articles I found:
1)
"Research suggests that the drugs protect areas of the brain injured by stress. "SSRIs may protect against damage associated with depression," says Yvette I. Sheline, MD, a professor of psychiatry at the Washington University School of Medicine, in St. Louis, who did some of the research. A Columbia University study suggests that antidepressants may even significantly stimulate the production of new nerve cells in these key regions, which could even further protect the brain from stress."
2)
NMHA News Release April 10, 2000
Contact: Lea Ann Browning McNee
Phone: (703) 837-4783
Cell: (301) 461-9351
“Prozac Backlash” Represents a Step Back in Mental Health TreatmentMental Health Advocates Warn Book May Keep People From Seeking Treatment
ALEXANDRIA, VA (April 10, 2000) The National Mental Health Association today voiced concern over what it called misleading statements in a new book that claims antidepressant medication is over-prescribed and causes serious side effects. The NMHA also expressed concern that the book, Prozac Backlash, could discourage people from seeking treatment.
NMHA's criticism of the book, written by Boston psychiatrist Joseph Glenmullen, M.D., was echoed by two leading psychiatrists, who said that the book's messages were misleading and irresponsible.
"The truth about depression and its treatment is just the opposite of what the book claims," noted Mike Faenza, president and CEO of NMHA. "In fact, clinical depression remains under-diagnosed and under-treated. Although not everyone with depression needs medication, the new generation of depression medication is much safer and more effective than those of the past."
Faenza noted that depression is a very serious health problem for over 19 million Americans, and left untreated can result in years of suffering and even suicide. Only about half of those with the illness seek and receive appropriate treatment, which includes psychotherapy ("talk therapy"), medication or a combination of the two.
Faenza cautioned that the book could have serious consequences if people accept its contents as fact. "Our organization has worked hard over the past decade to raise awareness about depression and the need to get help. We're concerned that people may decide against seeking appropriate treatment for this serious illness after hearing about this book."
A number of leading psychiatric researchers, whose work is cited by the book's author have also been critical of Prozac Backlash. "In cases where Dr. Glenmullen quoted studies published by me, he quotes the work out of context to fit his needs," said Anthony Rothschild, M.D., professor of psychiatry at the University of Massachusetts Medical School. "This book is misleading, and does a great disservice to people with depression. The very medications that the author claims are overused are, in fact, well studied, closely scrutinized and closely regulated."
"Dr. Glenmullen goes well beyond the published research on the side effects of these newer antidepressant medications, the SSRI's, and into pure speculation," warned Harvey Ruben, MD, MPH, clinical professor at the Department of Psychiatry at Yale School of Medicine. "His messages are an irresponsible deterrent to those seeking help for depression, and border on inflammatory journalism."
The psychiatrists noted that SSRIs and other new medications for depression do have side effects that effect some patients. "This is true for any medication that treats any illness, and patients should always discuss side effects with their doctor," noted Dr. Ruben. "However, it is the overall safety and low incidence of serious side effects with these newer medications that have made them so effective in the treatment of depression."
Both psychiatrists noted that the suffering from depression usually far outweighs the side effects, usually temporary and minimal, of antidepressant medication. They shared the concern of the NMHA that the book's messages could cause people to avoid seeking help for depression, cause those now receiving treatment to discontinue it, or persuade people to use unproven, unregulated treatments including herbal remedies such as St. John's Wort.
"The sad fact is that stigma still surrounds treatment for mental illness," warned Faenza. "And books like this one unfortunately only add to this stigma. The real message about mental illness is one of hope -- that most people can recover with appropriate treatment." In fact, he noted, the U.S. Surgeon General recently released the first-ever Report on Mental Health, which identified mental health and mental illness as a key public health issue, and underscored the effectiveness of mental health treatments and services.
The National Mental Health Association is the country's oldest and largest nonprofit organization addressing all aspects of mental health and mental illness. With more than 340 affiliates nationwide, NMHA works to improve the mental health of all Americans through advocacy, education, research and service.
Posted by TheOutsider on July 6, 2004, at 9:11:31
In reply to Glenmullen is not credible, posted by Bill LL on July 6, 2004, at 8:39:06
Unfortunatly I'm not computer literate enough to post any links.
Nor am I well versed enough in neurochemistry to give a very certain anlysis of his article.There have been a lot of good posts here attacking the tone and conclusion of the article from SLS and others.
What I would like to know though is how reliable his anylisis of the monkeys brains was.It reminds me of similar scare mongering research about MDMA (Ecstacy).
Some people here will remember those pictures "This is your brain on ecstacy". They sound like the kind of 'before and after' pictures of monkeys brains, with large parts of the serotonin system destroyed.But with the MDMA studies it was later shown that the methods used to asses the brain damage caused by MDMA were wildly inacurate, and infact rather than giving a realistic picture of the damage caused by MDMA, they were infact as we say in the UK 'Complete Bollox'
Note: I am not trying to defend MDMA, I'm just wondering how sound Glenmullen's methods are.
Also I'm Dyslexic so apologies for spelling.
Posted by linkadge on July 6, 2004, at 9:39:22
In reply to Glenmullen - How reliable are his methods?, posted by TheOutsider on July 6, 2004, at 9:11:31
What scares me is the fact that this guy did not publish the serotonin receptor corkscrew article, he was just referencing it. What he is saying is somewhat sound. We know that people who use methamphetamine over time show extensive nerotoxicity why couldn't this extend to other stimulants.
I agree that using SSRI's increases neurogenesis, this is because activating the 5ht1a receptor spurs downstream cell devision. But what this new reserch suggests is that the receptors themselves are getting destroyed. I don't think this is impossible to believe. Perhaps it is just the depression but since being on SSRI's my concentration and grades have slowly plummeted. I don't read books anymore cause I cannot understand what I am reading, my brain buzzes etc. These are symptoms that I never had, even when I was depressed.
I am scared because everybody I know who has discontinued an SSRI after using it 5+ years has had to return to it. Everybody I know who has discontinued and SSRI says that they're just not the same. Perhaps corkscrewed receptors is why some degree of poop out happens to almost all SSRI users.
I don't mean to cause panic but I just don't know how to get better.
Linkadge
Posted by harryp on July 6, 2004, at 10:29:41
In reply to Re: this article scares me, posted by linkadge on July 5, 2004, at 16:52:13
Hi!
To be honest, most SSRI research is questionable.
I wouldn't worry too much about this. You simply can't draw those kinds of conclusions responsibly from one study. Furthermore, MAO is ubiquitous in the body (unless you are taking a MAOI) and amine oxidation must occur all the time in the brain. I'm a little suspicious of his claim that oxidation releases toxic compounds that destroy neurons (I think he means free-radicals, which can do damage, but those are a normal product in the body).
It's possible that inhibiting serotonergic reuptake would increase oxidation (by increasing the enzyme substrate) and yield more free radicals than usual--but basically we'd be seeing lots of brain-damaged people at this point if Prozac were as bad as he suggests.
Posted by zeugma on July 6, 2004, at 10:35:10
In reply to Re: Glenmullen - How reliable are his methods?, posted by linkadge on July 6, 2004, at 9:39:22
> What scares me is the fact that this guy did not publish the serotonin receptor corkscrew article, he was just referencing it. What he is saying is somewhat sound. We know that people who use methamphetamine over time show extensive nerotoxicity why couldn't this extend to other stimulants.
>
> I agree that using SSRI's increases neurogenesis, this is because activating the 5ht1a receptor spurs downstream cell devision. But what this new reserch suggests is that the receptors themselves are getting destroyed. I don't think this is impossible to believe. Perhaps it is just the depression but since being on SSRI's my concentration and grades have slowly plummeted. I don't read books anymore cause I cannot understand what I am reading, my brain buzzes etc. These are symptoms that I never had, even when I was depressed.
>
> I am scared because everybody I know who has discontinued an SSRI after using it 5+ years has had to return to it. Everybody I know who has discontinued and SSRI says that they're just not the same. Perhaps corkscrewed receptors is why some degree of poop out happens to almost all SSRI users.
>
> I don't mean to cause panic but I just don't know how to get better.
>
>
>
>
> Linkadge
>i wonder if clomipramine is as prone to poop-out as SSRI's. It has been around since the '50's and I have not heard any reports of it corkscrewing receptors or anything.
Cheney endorses doxepin, a TCA, on the page linked to his article.
I know the 5-HT system is complicated, and there are fewer metabolic pathways for the degradation of 5-HT than there are for NE. I think that the concomitant use of serotonin antagonists (trazodone, mirtazapine, etc.) probably helps preserve the serotonin/dopamine balance, which is a major theme of Glenmullen's book, and this must be a good thing for serotonin receptors. (Glenmullen doesn't mention this, by the way; he is mostly interested in alarmism.) Buspirone is another option, because it is a serotonin modulator (it either lowers or raises 5-HT levels based on the amount of 5-HT in the system, and also increases DA and NE levels).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Posted by SLS on July 6, 2004, at 12:30:57
In reply to Re: Glenmullen - How reliable are his methods?, posted by zeugma on July 6, 2004, at 10:35:10
Hi.
> i wonder if clomipramine is as prone to poop-out as SSRI's. It has been around since the '50's and I have not heard any reports of it corkscrewing receptors or anything.
Forgive my ignorance, but what exactly is corkscrewing receptors?Thanks.
- Scott
Posted by zeugma on July 6, 2004, at 12:33:31
In reply to Re: Glenmullen - How reliable are his methods? » zeugma, posted by SLS on July 6, 2004, at 12:30:57
'corkscrewing receptors' seems to be a colloquialism for the end result of exposing the brain to a good roasting.
Posted by Sad Panda on July 7, 2004, at 2:22:02
In reply to Glenmullen is not credible, posted by Bill LL on July 6, 2004, at 8:39:06
> 2)
> NMHA News Release April 10, 2000
> Contact: Lea Ann Browning McNee
> Phone: (703) 837-4783
> Cell: (301) 461-9351
>
> “Prozac Backlash” Represents a Step Back in Mental Health Treatment
>
> Mental Health Advocates Warn Book May Keep People From Seeking Treatment
>
> ALEXANDRIA, VA (April 10, 2000) The National Mental Health Association today voiced concern over what it called misleading statements in a new book that claims antidepressant medication is over-prescribed and causes serious side effects. The NMHA also expressed concern that the book, Prozac Backlash, could discourage people from seeking treatment.
>
> NMHA's criticism of the book, written by Boston psychiatrist Joseph Glenmullen, M.D., was echoed by two leading psychiatrists, who said that the book's messages were misleading and irresponsible.
>
> "The truth about depression and its treatment is just the opposite of what the book claims," noted Mike Faenza, president and CEO of NMHA. "In fact, clinical depression remains under-diagnosed and under-treated. Although not everyone with depression needs medication, the new generation of depression medication is much safer and more effective than those of the past."
>
> Faenza noted that depression is a very serious health problem for over 19 million Americans, and left untreated can result in years of suffering and even suicide. Only about half of those with the illness seek and receive appropriate treatment, which includes psychotherapy ("talk therapy"), medication or a combination of the two.
>
> Faenza cautioned that the book could have serious consequences if people accept its contents as fact. "Our organization has worked hard over the past decade to raise awareness about depression and the need to get help. We're concerned that people may decide against seeking appropriate treatment for this serious illness after hearing about this book."
>
> A number of leading psychiatric researchers, whose work is cited by the book's author have also been critical of Prozac Backlash. "In cases where Dr. Glenmullen quoted studies published by me, he quotes the work out of context to fit his needs," said Anthony Rothschild, M.D., professor of psychiatry at the University of Massachusetts Medical School. "This book is misleading, and does a great disservice to people with depression. The very medications that the author claims are overused are, in fact, well studied, closely scrutinized and closely regulated."
>
> "Dr. Glenmullen goes well beyond the published research on the side effects of these newer antidepressant medications, the SSRI's, and into pure speculation," warned Harvey Ruben, MD, MPH, clinical professor at the Department of Psychiatry at Yale School of Medicine. "His messages are an irresponsible deterrent to those seeking help for depression, and border on inflammatory journalism."
>
> The psychiatrists noted that SSRIs and other new medications for depression do have side effects that effect some patients. "This is true for any medication that treats any illness, and patients should always discuss side effects with their doctor," noted Dr. Ruben. "However, it is the overall safety and low incidence of serious side effects with these newer medications that have made them so effective in the treatment of depression."
>
> Both psychiatrists noted that the suffering from depression usually far outweighs the side effects, usually temporary and minimal, of antidepressant medication. They shared the concern of the NMHA that the book's messages could cause people to avoid seeking help for depression, cause those now receiving treatment to discontinue it, or persuade people to use unproven, unregulated treatments including herbal remedies such as St. John's Wort.
>
> "The sad fact is that stigma still surrounds treatment for mental illness," warned Faenza. "And books like this one unfortunately only add to this stigma. The real message about mental illness is one of hope -- that most people can recover with appropriate treatment." In fact, he noted, the U.S. Surgeon General recently released the first-ever Report on Mental Health, which identified mental health and mental illness as a key public health issue, and underscored the effectiveness of mental health treatments and services.
>
> The National Mental Health Association is the country's oldest and largest nonprofit organization addressing all aspects of mental health and mental illness. With more than 340 affiliates nationwide, NMHA works to improve the mental health of all Americans through advocacy, education, research and service.
>
>
>
>
>I think that this NMHA News Release is what I believe in. Cheney's opinion on SSRI's just looks like scare mongering without an actual purpose.
Cheers,
Panda.
Posted by Bill LL on July 7, 2004, at 8:34:37
In reply to Re: Glenmullen - How reliable are his methods?, posted by linkadge on July 6, 2004, at 9:39:22
Linkage- You report that being on SSRI's are adversely affecting your ability to comprehend what you read.
I would strongly suggest that you ask your doctor about adding an ADD drug such as Adderal, Strattera, or Ritalin. Why should you have to choose between being depressed or being ADD when you can deal with both at the same time?
My experience has been different than yours. Before antidepressants, I could never really read and comprehend a book. I needed to use Cliff Notes. And even those I had to read several times. Also, I couldn't pay attention in class for any length of time. And when I went to the movies, I would miss half of what was going on.
When I started on antidepressants, my concentration improved. I think it improved because I felt more relaxed and was therefore better able to concentrate. But I still had ADD symptoms even though they were not as bad as before. I then added Strattera (120 mg per day) 2 months a go and now feel even more relaxed and better able to concentrate. I also take 30 mg Lexapro.
Posted by linkadge on July 7, 2004, at 9:33:34
In reply to SSRI's and concentration- Linkage, posted by Bill LL on July 7, 2004, at 8:34:37
I have some symptoms of psychosis that flare up if I take stimulants. Straterra is not available in canada yet. I can get by on just an SSRI, but If I take a stimulant things go awry.
I have tried adding a stimulant and an antipschotic but that sort of combination really messes with your head.
Linkadge
Posted by nicky847 on July 7, 2004, at 11:29:59
In reply to Re: Glenmullen is not credible, posted by Sad Panda on July 7, 2004, at 2:22:02
I think a big part of whether a med will help you or not is what you prefer to believe about the treatment..if you believe it is helping you then your chances of success are greater..myself i prefer to believe the research that says that the meds protect areas of my brain which affect mood..i like that :-)
Posted by linkadge on July 7, 2004, at 16:25:20
In reply to Re: Glenmullen is not credible, posted by nicky847 on July 7, 2004, at 11:29:59
Believing one thing or another may help your mood, but it is unlikely to alter the fact that a medication may be damaging the brain.
I am very depressed now, but I don't want to have to take 500mg of prozac in the future, just to feel normal in the retirement home.
Linkadge
Posted by zeugma on July 7, 2004, at 16:59:51
In reply to Re: Glenmullen is not credible, posted by linkadge on July 7, 2004, at 16:25:20
> Believing one thing or another may help your mood, but it is unlikely to alter the fact that a medication may be damaging the brain.
>
> I am very depressed now, but I don't want to have to take 500mg of prozac in the future, just to feel normal in the retirement home.
>
> Linkadgelinkadge,
No doubt antidepressants damage the brain, but depression itself damages the brain. Glenmullen's book (I've skimmed it in barnes and Nobles) is mostly anecdotes about how SSRI's have been overprescribed and how the drugs are less innocuous than pharm companies and zealous psydocs would have us believe. He's a stap up from Breggin in that his analyses are more sophisticated, but essentially he is saying that depression is treatable with talk therapy, and we know that in serious cases that in itself is a harmful lie (I have been in 'talk therapy' all my life, and if it worked I would not be here in misery trying to find some answer in pharmacology. in fact psychotherapy itself can be destructive, and people have written books on that too.)
Posted by shadows721 on July 7, 2004, at 20:01:10
In reply to Re: Glenmullen is not credible, posted by zeugma on July 7, 2004, at 16:59:51
I think this guy is pushing the vitamin, diet, and exercise issue. I did that. It didn't touch my depression.
My T showed me slides of brains with different dx with and without medications. There was an improvement with the medications, so I don't know where this guy gets his info. His data stated "very potent" doses of ssri's. As usual, those poor animals that probably don't have the disorder to begin with were just about poisoned to death with SSRI's. They probably pumped those poor monkey full of doses that was considered just about lethal. What does it prove? Yes, you can do damage to your brain probably by taking a dose of SSRI 50X(?) higher than normal everyday for 10 years straight and you were not even depressed. (We really need to know the dosage and was it all SSRI's or a particular SSRI.) We are depressed and aren't on "very potent" dosages. What the heck is the potent dosage anyway? What SSRI are we talking about all of them were tried or just a few? That term "fried" is not a medical term used in research studies. I have never heard a doctor say, "Mr. SoSo, I am sorry to tell you the results of your EEG show that your brain is now fried." What!!!? :0
Perhaps that study was more like this ....It would be like what would happen if you eat 2 pound bag of sugar every day for ten years vs 2 teaspoons of sugar every day for ten years.
There isn't enough info in that report to be deemed reliable and valid research.
Posted by Sad Panda on July 7, 2004, at 23:17:45
In reply to FRIED?, posted by shadows721 on July 7, 2004, at 20:01:10
Somewhere in between totally fried & a total depression cure is the truth. If the SSRI you are taking doesn't agree with you then you should try another one & you will be fine. I'm sure those poor monkeys would have done the same thing if they had a choice rather than take an overdose for the sake of science. :/
Cheers,
Panda.
Posted by nicky847 on July 8, 2004, at 11:41:20
In reply to FRIED?, posted by shadows721 on July 7, 2004, at 20:01:10
hahahaha..
> That term "fried" is not a medical term used in research studies. I have never heard a doctor say, "Mr. SoSo, I am sorry to tell you the results of your EEG show that your brain is now fried." What!!!? :0
>
>
Posted by nicky847 on July 8, 2004, at 11:42:36
In reply to Re: Glenmullen is not credible, posted by linkadge on July 7, 2004, at 16:25:20
I will worry about the retirement home when and if I make it to the retirement home..for now i'm in my 20s and want to be able to enjoy my life..
> Believing one thing or another may help your mood, but it is unlikely to alter the fact that a medication may be damaging the brain.
>
> I am very depressed now, but I don't want to have to take 500mg of prozac in the future, just to feel normal in the retirement home.
>
> Linkadge
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.