![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 17 of 17. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Cee on August 16, 2012, at 22:17:57
Hello again seems I come here for info and morel support
Thank you. I have taken 750 mg of serequel xr for about five years but I am not sure how good it is. For me. Anybody else have any info my pdoc says it is ok but I do not trust him
Thx cee
Posted by Phillipa on August 16, 2012, at 22:48:51
In reply to Seroquel. Long term is it safe?, posted by Cee on August 16, 2012, at 22:17:57
Cee try a google search for safety. Some are now implicating in cognitive functions was in my RN newsletter today. Phillipa
Posted by Raisinb on August 17, 2012, at 0:23:25
In reply to Seroquel. Long term is it safe?, posted by Cee on August 16, 2012, at 22:17:57
It is an atypical antipsychotic so if you notice any signs of tardive dyskinesia, you should stop it immediately. My pdoc claims this is a very rare condition, but he IS a pdoc and sometimes I think they downplay the risks.
Posted by Phil on August 17, 2012, at 8:51:34
In reply to Seroquel. Long term is it safe?, posted by Cee on August 16, 2012, at 22:17:57
See my post above on rare side effects of AP's. You're on 2.5 times the dose as I was on.
Posted by Lou Pilder on August 18, 2012, at 8:05:33
In reply to Seroquel. Long term is it safe?, posted by Cee on August 16, 2012, at 22:17:57
> Hello again seems I come here for info and morel support
> Thank you. I have taken 750 mg of serequel xr for about five years but I am not sure how good it is. For me. Anybody else have any info my pdoc says it is ok but I do not trust him
> Thx ceecee,
You wrote the above. You would like info concerning the safety or not of Seroquel. You also do not trust your doctor in the promotion of the drug as being "OK".
"OK" for who?
Now let us do some critical thinking here. You want to know about the long-term safety of taking Seroquel. Well, it does stand to reason that the longer you take a drug, the more the chances are that the drug could kill you. It is like drawing a card out of a deck of cards. But what if you do not replace the card that you draw and then draw again and again and again. Would you not then have to draw the Joker at some draw?
And now lets look at another possibility. Suppose some of thye chemical in the drug is retained in your body after each pill that you take? And as time goes by, coulkd not there be a deadly amount of the drug in your system? Or could not the accumulation of the chemical be of such a nature that it could cause non-reversible brain damage or damage to other orgams of the body? If not, why not?
But death is what can happen to those that take Seroquel. What benefit could outweigh death?
Now your prescriber can leagally give you a drug that could kill you. And he/she can leagally say that it is {OK}. Did your prescriber tell you before you took the drug that people die from this drug? If not, could you think of a rational reason why you were not made aware of the caliber of disaster that could become to you by taking this drug?
And then the prescriber could have told you that you have to take the drug for so many days or weeks before it "works". Sure, for after those weeks and you want off of it, you could be addicted to the drug. Now ya got trouble my friend. And after 5 years of taking this drug, are you prepared to experiance a horrific time in your life in that you could find yourself in withdrawal and want to kill yourself and/or others?
There are people here that advocate that others take drugs. But I say to you, take no thought for (redacted by respondent) you to do. Is not life in a dark place better than death? And could not being alive retain a hope to come out of the darkness into a marvelous light? I cam to tell you about the light and lead you to the truth that goes beyond psychiatry/psychology. You see, I am not anti-psychiatry, I am anti-death. And chances are your chances are.
Lou
http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/seroquel/death
Posted by bleauberry on August 18, 2012, at 9:08:17
In reply to Seroquel. Long term is it safe?, posted by Cee on August 16, 2012, at 22:17:57
Nothing is safe long term, not even life itself. By saying "safe", if you are talking life/death safeness, I don't see any long term significant risk there. There is always some with any med, but probably low in this case. If you are talking other forms of safe, such as movement disorders or nervous system disorders, then yeah, antipsychotics are well known for not being safe long term.
I went 8 years on zyprexa and it seemed safe enough, except for the permanent finger tremors it caused.
Sorry you don't trust your doctor, but I certainly hear you on that. My eyes have seen that they can be really good on a few isolated topics, but in general are rather disappointing and charge way too much money considering the lack of proof of expertness or results. They get paid a lot for "good intentions", regardless whether performance is respectable or not.
I see disappointments, or what I see as disappointments in many fields of medicine. For example, bladder and prostate are good targets for lyme related infections. How come my urinologist, as good as he is, knows absolutely nothing about lyme disease? He should, because it impacts the urinary system directly. Instead, they call symptoms "idiopathic", which means no explanation, when in fact there are explanations.
Or how about the ER doctor who gives a patient, me, 250mg Tetracycline as a prophylactic dose against possible lyme after he removed a tick from my leg. In the past I had taken 500mg 3 times a day for months and it barely scratched the surface in lyme, but he thinks a single dose of 250mg is going to do anythinig? And then he explained to me that is based on a study....a single study. Boggles the mind.
I could go on and on. Sorry, no disrespect intended to medical pros, just venting frustration and disappointment. I guess if those guys were paid $15 an hour instead of $200 an hour, then maybe it would all be more acceptable to me. I just can't see being paid that much when actual performance is kind of spotty and random.
Posted by Novelagent on August 18, 2012, at 11:52:54
In reply to Seroquel. Long term is it safe?, posted by Cee on August 16, 2012, at 22:17:57
> Hello again seems I come here for info and morel support
> Thank you. I have taken 750 mg of serequel xr for about five years but I am not sure how good it is. For me. Anybody else have any info my pdoc says it is ok but I do not trust him
> Thx ceeSwitch to Invega-- it has less of a risk of type II diabeties, which seroquel can cause even independent of weight gain.
Posted by Lou Pilder on August 18, 2012, at 12:14:14
In reply to Re: Seroquel. Long term is it safe?, posted by Novelagent on August 18, 2012, at 11:52:54
> > Hello again seems I come here for info and morel support
> > Thank you. I have taken 750 mg of serequel xr for about five years but I am not sure how good it is. For me. Anybody else have any info my pdoc says it is ok but I do not trust him
> > Thx cee
>
> Switch to Invega-- it has less of a risk of type II diabeties, which seroquel can cause even independent of weight gain.N_a,
You wrote,[...Switch to Invega...less of a risk for typeII diabetes...].
I am unsure as to what you are wanting to advise or not to the innitiator of this thread or not. If you could post answes to the fiollowing, then I could have the opportunity to post my response to you here.
True or false?
A. Your rationale for the advise is that you are being supportive to the innitiator of this thread.
B. Since the metabolite in Invega can cause death more often than Seroquel, then support is to advise one to switch to take a drug that can cause death more than Seroquel?
C. You think that this site is supportive to the advise that you have given here?
D. (redacted by respondent)
Lou
http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/risperdal/death
Posted by Lou Pilder on August 18, 2012, at 12:55:49
In reply to Re: Seroquel. Long term is it safe?, posted by bleauberry on August 18, 2012, at 9:08:17
> Nothing is safe long term, not even life itself. By saying "safe", if you are talking life/death safeness, I don't see any long term significant risk there. There is always some with any med, but probably low in this case. If you are talking other forms of safe, such as movement disorders or nervous system disorders, then yeah, antipsychotics are well known for not being safe long term.
>
> I went 8 years on zyprexa and it seemed safe enough, except for the permanent finger tremors it caused.
>
> Sorry you don't trust your doctor, but I certainly hear you on that. My eyes have seen that they can be really good on a few isolated topics, but in general are rather disappointing and charge way too much money considering the lack of proof of expertness or results. They get paid a lot for "good intentions", regardless whether performance is respectable or not.
>
> I see disappointments, or what I see as disappointments in many fields of medicine. For example, bladder and prostate are good targets for lyme related infections. How come my urinologist, as good as he is, knows absolutely nothing about lyme disease? He should, because it impacts the urinary system directly. Instead, they call symptoms "idiopathic", which means no explanation, when in fact there are explanations.
>
> Or how about the ER doctor who gives a patient, me, 250mg Tetracycline as a prophylactic dose against possible lyme after he removed a tick from my leg. In the past I had taken 500mg 3 times a day for months and it barely scratched the surface in lyme, but he thinks a single dose of 250mg is going to do anythinig? And then he explained to me that is based on a study....a single study. Boggles the mind.
>
> I could go on and on. Sorry, no disrespect intended to medical pros, just venting frustration and disappointment. I guess if those guys were paid $15 an hour instead of $200 an hour, then maybe it would all be more acceptable to me. I just can't see being paid that much when actual performance is kind of spotty and random.bleau,
You wrote,[...I don't see any long-term significant risk (life/death safeness)...].
I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean here to the innitiator of this thread. If you could post answers here, then I could respond to you.
True or false.
A. You will post what you understnd to be (a significant risk)?
B. You will not post what your understanding of a significant risk is?
C.Since you posted that you do not see any long term significant risk (life/death safeness), then your advise here is based upon what you consider to be a significant risk without defining what you are wanting to mean by significant?
D. If you elect now to post here what your understanding of significant is, could that change your advise to the innitiator of this thread?
E. If the innitiator of this thread takes your advise as posted before you post a modification, if you post such, do you think that there is the potential that you could you be held liable for the death of the innitiator of this thread if their death was caused by taking Seroquel and they followed what you posted as that you do not see and long-term significant risk?
F. redacted by respondent
Lou
http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/seroquel/suicide+ideation
Posted by Lou Pilder on August 18, 2012, at 13:01:08
In reply to Lou's request- » bleauberry, posted by Lou Pilder on August 18, 2012, at 12:55:49
> > Nothing is safe long term, not even life itself. By saying "safe", if you are talking life/death safeness, I don't see any long term significant risk there. There is always some with any med, but probably low in this case. If you are talking other forms of safe, such as movement disorders or nervous system disorders, then yeah, antipsychotics are well known for not being safe long term.
> >
> > I went 8 years on zyprexa and it seemed safe enough, except for the permanent finger tremors it caused.
> >
> > Sorry you don't trust your doctor, but I certainly hear you on that. My eyes have seen that they can be really good on a few isolated topics, but in general are rather disappointing and charge way too much money considering the lack of proof of expertness or results. They get paid a lot for "good intentions", regardless whether performance is respectable or not.
> >
> > I see disappointments, or what I see as disappointments in many fields of medicine. For example, bladder and prostate are good targets for lyme related infections. How come my urinologist, as good as he is, knows absolutely nothing about lyme disease? He should, because it impacts the urinary system directly. Instead, they call symptoms "idiopathic", which means no explanation, when in fact there are explanations.
> >
> > Or how about the ER doctor who gives a patient, me, 250mg Tetracycline as a prophylactic dose against possible lyme after he removed a tick from my leg. In the past I had taken 500mg 3 times a day for months and it barely scratched the surface in lyme, but he thinks a single dose of 250mg is going to do anythinig? And then he explained to me that is based on a study....a single study. Boggles the mind.
> >
> > I could go on and on. Sorry, no disrespect intended to medical pros, just venting frustration and disappointment. I guess if those guys were paid $15 an hour instead of $200 an hour, then maybe it would all be more acceptable to me. I just can't see being paid that much when actual performance is kind of spotty and random.
>
> bleau,
> You wrote,[...I don't see any long-term significant risk (life/death safeness)...].
> I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean here to the innitiator of this thread. If you could post answers here, then I could respond to you.
> True or false.
> A. You will post what you understnd to be (a significant risk)?
> B. You will not post what your understanding of a significant risk is?
> C.Since you posted that you do not see any long term significant risk (life/death safeness), then your advise here is based upon what you consider to be a significant risk without defining what you are wanting to mean by significant?
> D. If you elect now to post here what your understanding of significant is, could that change your advise to the innitiator of this thread?
> E. If the innitiator of this thread takes your advise as posted before you post a modification, if you post such, do you think that there is the potential that you could you be held liable for the death of the innitiator of this thread if their death was caused by taking Seroquel and they followed what you posted as that you do not see and long-term significant risk?
> F. redacted by respondent
> Lou
> http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/seroquel/suicide+ideationcorrection;
http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/seroquel/suicidal+ideation
Posted by phidippus on August 19, 2012, at 0:40:18
In reply to Seroquel. Long term is it safe?, posted by Cee on August 16, 2012, at 22:17:57
Why don't you trust your pdoc?
Like all antipsychotics, Seroquel can halt brain growth over the long haul-http://www.cchrint.org/tag/brain-shrinkage/
Other than that, you have the risk of Tardive Diskenasia.
Eric
Posted by Novelagent on August 20, 2012, at 13:24:43
In reply to Lou's request-psuhpoart » Novelagent, posted by Lou Pilder on August 18, 2012, at 12:14:14
Lou,
I'm not sure what you're talking about, other than that Risperdal/Invega can cause sudden death just as much as other antipsychotics, but this is limited to geriatric (elderly) patients, who metabolize it differently. That doesn't apply to people who aren't geriatric.
Also, Lou, your writing is bizarre and frankly I'm concerned it suggests you're on too high of a dose of amphetamines.
> > Hello again seems I come here for info and morel support
> > > Thank you. I have taken 750 mg of serequel xr for about five years but I am not sure how good it is. For me. Anybody else have any info my pdoc says it is ok but I do not trust him
> > > Thx cee
> >
> > Switch to Invega-- it has less of a risk of type II diabeties, which seroquel can cause even independent of weight gain.
>
> N_a,
> You wrote,[...Switch to Invega...less of a risk for typeII diabetes...].
> I am unsure as to what you are wanting to advise or not to the innitiator of this thread or not. If you could post answes to the fiollowing, then I could have the opportunity to post my response to you here.
> True or false?
> A. Your rationale for the advise is that you are being supportive to the innitiator of this thread.
> B. Since the metabolite in Invega can cause death more often than Seroquel, then support is to advise one to switch to take a drug that can cause death more than Seroquel?
> C. You think that this site is supportive to the advise that you have given here?
> D. (redacted by respondent)
> Lou
> http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/risperdal/death
Posted by Lou Pilder on August 20, 2012, at 14:05:31
In reply to Re: Lou's request » Lou Pilder, posted by Novelagent on August 20, 2012, at 13:24:43
> Lou,
>
> I'm not sure what you're talking about, other than that Risperdal/Invega can cause sudden death just as much as other antipsychotics, but this is limited to geriatric (elderly) patients, who metabolize it differently. That doesn't apply to people who aren't geriatric.
>
> Also, Lou, your writing is bizarre and frankly I'm concerned it suggests you're on too high of a dose of amphetamines.
>
> > > Hello again seems I come here for info and morel support
> > > > Thank you. I have taken 750 mg of serequel xr for about five years but I am not sure how good it is. For me. Anybody else have any info my pdoc says it is ok but I do not trust him
> > > > Thx cee
> > >
> > > Switch to Invega-- it has less of a risk of type II diabeties, which seroquel can cause even independent of weight gain.
> >
> > N_a,
> > You wrote,[...Switch to Invega...less of a risk for typeII diabetes...].
> > I am unsure as to what you are wanting to advise or not to the innitiator of this thread or not. If you could post answes to the fiollowing, then I could have the opportunity to post my response to you here.
> > True or false?
> > A. Your rationale for the advise is that you are being supportive to the innitiator of this thread.
> > B. Since the metabolite in Invega can cause death more often than Seroquel, then support is to advise one to switch to take a drug that can cause death more than Seroquel?
> > C. You think that this site is supportive to the advise that you have given here?
> > D. (redacted by respondent)
> > Lou
> > http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/risperdal/death
>
> N_a,
You wrote the above. If you could post answers to the following, then I could respond to you.
A. In your defintion of a {geriatric} person, what is the age group that you are wanting to mean?
B. If there is that {restriction} to that age group, since you state that those that die suddenly that took that drug are {limited} to geriatric people, by what authority, if any, do you use to make that claim?
C. Would you be willing to take the responsibility and liability if someone dies from taking the drug in question and it could be shown that they acted on that you stated here that those that died from the drug were restricted to geriatric people and the person that died was 40 years old, which is generally accepted as not being geriatric, and took the drug thinking from reading what you posted that they were not a geriatric person so in their thinking they thought that they could not die from the drug since you wrote ,[...That doesn't apply to people that aren't geriatric...]?
D. By what authority do you use, if any, to classify my writing as {redacted by respondent}?
Lou
Posted by novelagent on August 22, 2012, at 1:23:49
In reply to Lou's reply-schoughdhamo » Novelagent, posted by Lou Pilder on August 20, 2012, at 14:05:31
Lou,
The doctor who explained the sudden death risk (sudden death is the term used for a specific heart complication that also goes by a very long name) is a doctor who has actually written over 100 publications, one of which was on the subject. He mentioned doctors are looking to research (including himself) how to break down the geriatric patients who get sudden death while on an antipsychotic, to see if within this population, it's a specific type of geriatric patient's genes that predispose them to sudden death.
I think you should take klonopin and ease up on your dose of amphetamine, I'm concerned about you, and your writing is always so amphetamine-induced. It's like typing back to a drug this is...
> > Lou,
> >
> > I'm not sure what you're talking about, other than that Risperdal/Invega can cause sudden death just as much as other antipsychotics, but this is limited to geriatric (elderly) patients, who metabolize it differently. That doesn't apply to people who aren't geriatric.
> >
> > Also, Lou, your writing is bizarre and frankly I'm concerned it suggests you're on too high of a dose of amphetamines.
> >
> > > > Hello again seems I come here for info and morel support
> > > > > Thank you. I have taken 750 mg of serequel xr for about five years but I am not sure how good it is. For me. Anybody else have any info my pdoc says it is ok but I do not trust him
> > > > > Thx cee
> > > >
> > > > Switch to Invega-- it has less of a risk of type II diabeties, which seroquel can cause even independent of weight gain.
> > >
> > > N_a,
> > > You wrote,[...Switch to Invega...less of a risk for typeII diabetes...].
> > > I am unsure as to what you are wanting to advise or not to the innitiator of this thread or not. If you could post answes to the fiollowing, then I could have the opportunity to post my response to you here.
> > > True or false?
> > > A. Your rationale for the advise is that you are being supportive to the innitiator of this thread.
> > > B. Since the metabolite in Invega can cause death more often than Seroquel, then support is to advise one to switch to take a drug that can cause death more than Seroquel?
> > > C. You think that this site is supportive to the advise that you have given here?
> > > D. (redacted by respondent)
> > > Lou
> > > http://www.ehealthme.com/ds/risperdal/death
> >
> > N_a,
> You wrote the above. If you could post answers to the following, then I could respond to you.
> A. In your defintion of a {geriatric} person, what is the age group that you are wanting to mean?
> B. If there is that {restriction} to that age group, since you state that those that die suddenly that took that drug are {limited} to geriatric people, by what authority, if any, do you use to make that claim?
> C. Would you be willing to take the responsibility and liability if someone dies from taking the drug in question and it could be shown that they acted on that you stated here that those that died from the drug were restricted to geriatric people and the person that died was 40 years old, which is generally accepted as not being geriatric, and took the drug thinking from reading what you posted that they were not a geriatric person so in their thinking they thought that they could not die from the drug since you wrote ,[...That doesn't apply to people that aren't geriatric...]?
> D. By what authority do you use, if any, to classify my writing as {redacted by respondent}?
> Lou
>
>
>
Posted by SLS on August 22, 2012, at 5:08:06
In reply to Re: Lou's third-person reply, posted by novelagent on August 22, 2012, at 1:23:49
> Lou,
>
> The doctor who explained the sudden death risk (sudden death is the term used for a specific heart complication that also goes by a very long name) is a doctor who has actually written over 100 publications, one of which was on the subject. He mentioned doctors are looking to research (including himself) how to break down the geriatric patients who get sudden death while on an antipsychotic, to see if within this population, it's a specific type of geriatric patient's genes that predispose them to sudden death.Studies of Alzheimer's Dementia consistently demonstrate an association between antipsychotic use and an increased rate of mortality. Is this effect limited to Alzheimer's?
Regarding the use of antipsychotics in the elderly, I have seen studies indicating that Haldol is the most likely and Seroquel the least likely to increase rates of mortality.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22362541
- Scott
Posted by Phil on August 22, 2012, at 12:09:09
In reply to Seroquel. Long term is it safe?, posted by Cee on August 16, 2012, at 22:17:57
Read the addition to my post above. Maybe they are worth the risk but are they safe? I'd say no and to stay away from them if possible.
No pill is safe including Ibuprofen which some people eat like jellybeans.
Posted by Phillipa on August 22, 2012, at 21:10:05
In reply to Re: Seroquel. Long term is it safe? » Cee, posted by Phil on August 22, 2012, at 12:09:09
Causes gastric bleeding motrin that is and now they meaning medical that it can lead to heart disease. No med is safe per say. Phillipa
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.