The depression theory

1. 59

   Bovine Currencyposted 14 years ago

   "As global marketing and the deregulation of industry expanded in the 1980s, the marketing
   potential for antidepressants was reassessed. Depression began to be promoted by
   pharmaceutical companies as a chemical “deficiency state”. The message delivered to doctors
   and consumers was that depressed people needed SSRI antidepressants to elevate their “depleted
   serotonin levels,” just as diabetics require insulin. This was an explanation anybody could
   understand."
   
   "Drug companies are not obliged to publish the results of negative clinical trials, even if negative
   trials are in the majority. This means that the lay public and physicians do not have access to
   comprehensive information on risks or benefits. As well, drug companies design and fund most
   clinical trials themselves and the results of these trials are usually biased towards the positive.
   For example, 90% of industry-funded placebo trials reported positive results from the use of
   SSRIs in children compared to 55.6% of non-industry funded studies.22"
   
   
   Source:http://www.whp-apsf.ca/pdf/SSRIs.pdf

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Curious Jenposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Some people need to take drugs for mental health issues.  There is no denying the benefits.  However, all types of drugs are over-prescribed.  Be careful.  Educate yourself.  Find a doctor that you trust and ask many, many questions.
      Do not get all of your information from blogs on the website.  Trust people with medical or health degrees and ask tons of questions.

      replyreport
2. 59

   Bovine Currencyposted 14 years ago

   Make up your own mind but I know a con when I see one.

   replyreport
   1. 62

      prettydarkhorseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Hi Bovine, I believe that anything you take which is not natural is bad,(altering the system of the brain etc)....
      
      and it is a big business of course....as the demand also inrease and other medical groups extend the definition of depression etc....

      replyreport
3. 69

   Cagsilposted 14 years ago

   The depression theory is a hoax and only for the benefit of business. It is only a state of mind.

   replyreport
4. 63

   AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years ago

   The evidence shows that cognitive-behavioural therapy, interpersonal therapy, and other forms of "talk" therapy can be, on balance, as effective as drugs. Of course, drugs companies can't make a profit on those...

   replyreport
5. 77

   kirstenblogposted 14 years ago

   During my teen years I was put on loads of different anti-depressants. I would start one and seem elevated for a couple of days, then deflate so they would up the meds. At the end of each month I would get a blood test and was always found to have toxic levels in my system so it was time for a game of medication musical chairs and off to a new drug. Funny how easy it was to chalk up my depression to a chemical imbalance not a traumatic childhood. Pills do not change bad life experiences! I did find one or two of the pills prescribed would haves been great for recreational uses but for daily consumption, nu uh!

   replyreport
6. 59

   Bovine Currencyposted 14 years ago

   The point being Adsense, not that other therapies can be as effective but drug therapy, or at least in this specific case, SSRI anti-depressants ARE NOT effective - they cause more harm than good.  There is a mountain load of evidence.  Same thing happened with benzodiazapines and essentially, when the benzo class was ruled a danger the pharmcos needed a new cash cow.

   replyreport
   1. 63

      AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      They're a blunt instrument, and blunt instruments can often do a lot of damage. Sometimes they are good, depending on the case, sometimes not, to be sure. The problem, of course (and I think this can be said of science in general now that public funding for research has been stripped the way it has, in favour of industry funding (at least in Canada)), that the motive for much of this stuff is not (just) getting at the truth, but making money.
      
      Let's face it, a better example could not be found than in the fact that malaria has not yet been beaten -- I am sure if there were big bucks in it, it would have been history long ago. Instead it is rampant... a friend of mine had it recently, it's not good news.... just not profitable...

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Bovine Currencyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Well said.

         replyreport
         1. 63

            AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Merci
            I have known people whose lives have been turned around by ssri's. But I have no illusions about the likelihood of their potential for harm/damage/ineffectualness also.

            replyreport
7. 60

   h.a.borcichposted 14 years ago

   Years ago I was diagnosed as "depressed" and put on meds - lots of them and told I would always need to be on them. For a while I believed it.
     After a few years I figured out what was wrong and it wasn't my SSRI levels. I'll have to write a hub about how I "cured" me as it would be too involved for the forum. I have not been on those drugs again and am fine.
     With the terminal cancer diagnosis the drs keep pushing the SSRI's at me but I refuse as I am not depressed.
     I do think some folks genuinely have a medical need for them, but overall these drugs are pushed more than they should be.
     Just my opinion, Holly

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Home Girlposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      AGREE

      replyreport
8. 0

   Home Girlposted 14 years ago

   ---Tell me about it! My two sons are on antidepressants and I can do nothing about it. NOTHING! I am sure it is addictive and dangerous and harms more than helps, but they claim that they(my sons) cannot live without it!? What can I do? I am ready to beat my head on the wall but do not see any solution. I try to joke about it, but they get upset and tell me that I do not understand the seriousness of the matter. I think that everything is out of proportion, but is it a conspiracy or smth. else, no idea...

   replyreport
9. 59

   Bovine Currencyposted 14 years ago

   There is a conspiracy.  I will not argue these drugs are without benefit for some but they are not only over prescribed but they are misrepresented.  The side effects are extremely dangerous and the 5 min GP is often clueless to the facts.  I do not support these drugs one inch.  'Some' benefit is not enough reason.  The some benefit could be reproduced with proper medical advice as opposed to script dispension.

   replyreport
10. 63

    Daniel Carterposted 14 years ago

    Biochemical depression is real. The absolute irresponsibility of the the big pharma companies is also real. They are as greedy as the big money machines, as evidenced by profit margins almost as big as oil companies two years ago.
    
    But because depression is real doesn't mean that the only answer is prescrip meds. If there is a biochemical imbalance, it has more to do with the body's inability to assimilate the nutrients it needs, (or not getting the nutrients it needs) than it does slamming it with synthetic substances whose biggest potential side effects are cancer and other diseases.
    
    I believe the prescrip meds do save lives, but I am absolutely against their use long-term. They do irreversible damage over extended periods of time. The short term, in crisis situations, they can save lives, but there really needs to be more education about the role of deficiencies in the body and how to compensate through better assimilation and nutrition.
    
    To me, it's not all one way or the other. It's mixed, but in the end it is a personal responsibility to care for our bodies and minds, not continuously pretend we are victims needing to be rescued by a Dr and prescription. Use those resources when needed and get educated so you can make informed decisions to help yourself.

    replyreport
    1. 59

       Bovine Currencyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       What is long term, what is short term?
       
       Most of these drugs take at least 4 - 6 weeks to take full biochemical effect.  So far as the therapy of the drug, effecting change, it is recommended (by the book) to take for six - 2 years.  After the drug is in full effect, if the user then wants to stop consuming the drug, there are further side effects from withdrawl thus making short term remedy with SSRI medications a null and void argument.  These drugs are wrong.

       replyreport
11. 59

    Bovine Currencyposted 14 years ago

    @ Daniel Carter,
    
    Furthermore, biochemical depression as you put it - I will use the term clinical depression, according to the DSM and ICM, medical manuals for diagnosis - clinical depression is a condition where depression is deep, constant and prolonged, at least six months.
    
    Serotonin, the chemical SSRI is supposed to regulate - this chemical is easily attained via sunlight or tryptophan.  Melatonin, the chemical precussor to serotonin, found in sunlight and also foods such as bananas and turkey, even if sunlight is not attainable, there are supplements that can be bought.  Melatonin will produce serotonin - fact.  No side effects.
    
    Anti-depressants are dangerous and should be avoided.  Most of the side effects, there are many, they mimic the symptoms of depression.  These are not low risk side effects, they are reported frequently.

    replyreport
    1. 63

       Daniel Carterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Ahh, yes, bovine, I'm INTIMATELY acquainted with all of this. I've written hubs about this stuff as well as protracted withdrawal symptoms trying to get off the crap.
       
       Long-term use is years. Short-term is months to a year or so. At least that's the info I've read and studied. I was misdiagnosed as bipolar, and went through unadulterated hell. Took well over a year to get through all the crap coming off 11 different meds, etc., protracted withdrawals and the whole drill.
       
       There are various and sundry complicated reasons why just "eating better" doesn't work for a lot of people, including things like parasites, intestinal yeast, and a host of other parasites that inhibit assimilation, and then there's the possibility of organ damage, whether digestion or brain, which will prevent some nutrients from metabolizing correctly. In THOSE cases psychotropic meds are usually necessary, however, there are more and more people who consistently and presistently work with the condition of their bodies and find improvement over time, thus either eliminating all together prescrip meds, or at least lowering dosages and frequency.
       
       The reason I'm a proponant of prescrip meds is because of crisis situations. They do save lives, but I'm in complete agreement with you regarding the overwhelming conspiracy of big pharma companies in bed with the FDA and medical community. My own father died as a result of very complicated side effects from prescrip med use for a variety of illnesses including asthma. He was never depressed but suffered with heart, lung and kidney disease because of the meds he was on.
       
       So, I'm not disagreeing with you, really. I'm just qualifying it because our bodies are all different, and using a "catch-all" method to address these issues just isn't a good approach. But nutrition and correcting the body's inability to assimilate is key.

       replyreport
       1. 59

          Bovine Currencyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Nice one.  I get that and I agree that we are not in disagreement
          
          In theory, all this is good but you cannot stop corporate medicine.  It is only the end user, the consumer who can facilitate change.  Psychiatric conditions can only be diagnosed on self-reporting so it is flawed in that respect, then there is the complication of the doctor and factors of time and motivation.  I did play a little of the devils advocate in my posts but realistically, these medications are not all bad.  More than anything, I believe that both the consumer and physicians need a better education.  Depression is real and the understanding of what is is, a process.

          replyreport
          1. 63

             Daniel Carterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Personal wellness is a personal responsibility. Drs are there to consult with us regarding our issues, not necessarily to dictate. The pharma companies are greedy over and above any good they may provide. That's pretty much where the rubber hits the road for me.

             replyreport