Psycho-Babble Medication | about biological treatments | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: ADs may do more Harm than Good -New Research paper » Phillipa

Posted by SLS on April 30, 2012, at 22:16:08

In reply to Re: ADs may do more Harm than Good -New Research paper » SLS, posted by Phillipa on April 30, 2012, at 20:11:37

> Scott am I reading correctly.

I don't know.

> You have a sister that has mild depression and you would prefer she take ST Johns Wort?

She tried SJW once on her own. She reported that it helped. I prefer that she not take a powerful reuptake inhibitor if she can do without it. This is a personal decision that she has made for herself. If her condition were to deteriorate and affect her ability to function, I would certainly lobby her to see a doctor for treatment. My sister functions quite well without medication at the moment. Nardil was a godsend for her when she needed it.

> So in reality you don't find meds that safe?

In reality, I never said that. What do you mean by "safe"? Side effects are an issue, not death.

I believe that reuptake inhibitors can leave footprints on the terrain of the brain. Antidepressant-induced antidepressant refractoriness is an example of this. In other words, one often finds that they respond well to Paxil the first time they take it, and less well upon subsequent administrations. Paxil thus has produced persistent changes in the terrain of the brain. That's my belief, anyway.

> Or what would be a reason for her not taking medications?

Her reasons are to remain private. Sorry, Jan. I should not have mentioned her. That was pretty stupid of me.

> Also what's your definition of mild depression and anxiety.

I defer to the definitions used by members of the psychiatric profession. I am not sure exactly where to draw lines, if that's what you mean.

Depression and anxiety rating scales can provide an indication of severity, should you feel the need to rate yourself. I think the rating scales currently in use are too primitive, but they seem to be of some utility. Better ones are needed. Hamilton, Beck, Burns, Montgomery Åsberg, Zung, etc. I think they all suck. The HAM-D is probably the scale most often used. I bet improvements in rating systems would result in a reduction in the placebo response rate in clinical trials. It is ridiculous that these 50-year old measurement instruments still exist.

Antidepressants are not ideal treatments for depression or anxiety disorders. Are they universally safe? No.

Tylenol kills. What shall we do about this? I guess it is a matter of perspective and taking care in evaluating the rate of occurrence of these adverse events. Weighing the risk versus benefit of using antidepressants and antipsychotics have led me to decide to take them. Unfortunately, I feel that I have no better choice. The severity of my illness requires that it be treated. So far, the myriad drugs that I have taken over the last 30 years have not killed me. They haven't even left me with any obvious irreversible effects other than the possible induction of greater treatment resistance.

- Scott

Some see things as they are and ask why.
I dream of things that never were and ask why not.

- George Bernard Shaw




Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.


Start a new thread

Google www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Medication | Framed

poster:SLS thread:1016380