- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Messages
- 3,185
- Reaction score
- 112
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
For some of us, a simple truth is too hot to handle.
Oh how do I agree.
That is why I love this quote:
For some of us, a simple truth is too hot to handle.
Prescription pills are Britain’s third biggest killer: Side-effects of drugs taken for insomnia and anxiety kill thousands. Why do doctors hand them out like Smarties?
80 million prescriptions for psychiatric drugs are written in UK every year
Psychiatric drugs are the third major killer after heart disease and cancer
Professor Gøtzsche reveals the scale of the issue in a new book
Luke Montagu, 45, heir to the Earl of Sandwich, was wrongly prescribed anti-depressants which took him seven years to detox from
Prescription pills are Britain?s third biggest killer: Side-effects of drugs taken for insomnia and anxiety kill thousands. Why do doctors hand them out like Smarties? | Daily Mail Online
Ok, well first and foremost, I am not saying there are no people with problems. Not at all.Of course there are.
But there is NO PROOF for a 'chemical imbalance' is the cause of this. If there is NO PROOF then something else is going on.
I have here someone here who also has problems. and the psychiaters 'think" they can 'cure' this with their 'pills' . They can't. Hell, those psychiatrist even have no clue what is going on, but ACT as if they do. Actually they are following , unconsciously, the ways of the Pharmaceutical Companies.
There doesn't need to be proof only evidence. And the FDA requires some very stringent testing on drugs before they can be used.
The companys are at the mercy of the FDA.
Do you have any clue how many drugs are rejected and why?
There doesn't need to be proof only evidence. And the FDA requires some very stringent testing on drugs before they can be used.
The companys are at the mercy of the FDA.
Do you have any clue how many drugs are rejected and why?
Psychiatric drugs don't work. Some say there is a 'chemiical imbalanxce" but there is really no proof of that.
The only one profiting from these drugs are the drug companies.
Mostly these drugs are used at psychiatric wards to sedate people so they are no problem for the nurses.
And how about the (side) effects? side effects is actually a eufemism. Just call it other effects, and suddenly we can see this in another light.
Anothr problem is that these drugs can even cause the symptoms they should 'cure"!
Let's just face the fact that these drugs are very very very toxic.
It's a lot more complicated than that.
It is true psychiatric drugs work inconsistently. It is true there is mixed evidence about their long-term benefits, and in some cases, evidence of long-term harm. It is true the evidence of biochemical theory (at least as the actual cause of mental illness) is pretty weak. It is true we over-prescribe and over-medicate some people. It is true we often under-utilize other forms of therapy.
Well, I have talked with psychiatrist downplaying this all. Exactly as the companies do.And none of these things are being denied by the psychiatric establishment as a whole.
No, thjey are not. Unfortunately, doctors get indoctrinated into that system.All of them are still hotly debated.
The only thing denying any of this are the ads you see on TV put on, yes, by the drug companies. But if you look past the commercials and into what the medical field itself is talking about, none of this is being denied.
O, yes, sure there is.But it is also true that, for some people, in the environments in which we live, we simply don't have anything better.
There are people whose lives are saved by these drugs, just as much as there are people whose lives are unchanged or even worsened by them.
The issue of mental illness, especially in developed countries, is incredibly complex. I can't even begin to cover all the factors causing this situation in a single post, and there's probably even more that I don't even know about.
Well, yes it does. Evil or Not, they are there for the money and for sure not for the patiennst.And most of these factors don't simply boil down to a nice easy answer like "evil drug companies."
After all, it would be pretty difficult for them to peddle so many mental health drugs if we didn't genuinely have significant problems with mental health sociologically, wouldn't it.
I disagree.
Agree
Well, I have talked with psychiatrist downplaying this all. Exactly as the companies do.
And there are a lot of them. Of course not all, but as far as I can see that is a monority,
Furthermore, I don't live in the usa so can't command on that.
No, thjey are not. Unfortunately, doctors get indoctrinated into that system.
By a minority.
O, yes, sure there is.
ir DIED! btw I have to see the first person whose live is saved by these drugs!
It can be. However, there are studies that the remission rate for psychiatric patients is HIGHER in undeveloped countries. because they can not afford these drugs!
Isn't that saying something?
Well, yes it does. Evil or Not they are there for the money and for sure not for the patiennst.
I don't know what you mean here.
May I ask if you work in these field?
None of this means anything. Or has anything to do worth my post.one word: REVOLTING DOOR
The people at the FDA have worked before at the Pharmaceutical Companioes and vice versa.
Besides that, the checking of the safety of the medicines happens through..you guessed it..The Pharmaceutical Companies.
I would be interested in that statistic.
I would also be interested to know why nobody is ever sanctioned for prescribing "off label".
If you're simply going to deny everything without even offering a counter-argument, there isn't much for me to debate here. I doubt your psychiatrist "downplayed this all." He probably denied your simplistic conspiracy theory, and rightly so.
You're right, about less developed nations having better mental health. But do you seriously think lack of psyche drugs is the only difference between us and them? You're incredibly, deeply wrong.
They get more sun, more community, more quiet, more fatty oils in their diet, more exercise, more sense of accomplishment, and better sleep. All of these things have a profound affect on mental health.
They don't have much of a problem with mental illness TO BEGIN WITH. The whole reason we came up with these drugs is because our societies DO have an issue with mental illness, in huge numbers, and that's been true since long before psyche drugs even existed, which is why we invented them.
Their societies don't have that. They have the occasional schizophrenic or whatever (who has a substantial chance of maintaining functionality due to the community helping them, which is something we often lack in the West), but they don't have depressives and people with anxiety to anywhere near the extent we do.
Like I said, this is way more complicated than just "big pharma."
I've studied psychology at university level, though I didn't complete a degree in it. All of these things I mention -- all of this debate about the weak evidence for biochemical theory, the mixed evidence of the efficacy of drugs, etc -- was discussed in my classes. These are not "secrets" that anyone is trying to hide. These things are brought up in your very first psyche 101 class.
You're seeing a conspiracy where there isn't one.
The fact is, the mental health woes of the West are way more complicated than just "big pharma." And if you're not willing to acknowledge that, then you're doing nothing to help the problem.
Just getting rid of these drugs won't help anyone.
The drugs wouldn't be here in the first place if we didn't already have a serious sociological mental health problem. So what's your solution?
FDA-Rejected Prescription Drugs - Vaughn's Summaries
I was surprised to see Marek and astra among those.
None of this means anything. Or has anything to do worth my post.
LMFAO, I don't believe you.
Keep in mind that Pin believes in chem trails. Odd that chemicals provided in a clinical environment can't change people's behavior, but those that are supposedly sprayed from 25,000' in the air can. Maybe the solution is for psychiatric patients to hang out at airports where they can get the "good stuff".
You don't get it that I amwriting about psychiatric drugs!
So what exactly is that they are spraying from airliners??? I thought that it was drugs intended to make people more "pliable" for the gov't to control and isn't that what psychiatric drugs do -make people more "pliable" to the demands of society to fit in???
FDA-Rejected Prescription Drugs - Vaughn's Summaries
I was surprised to see Marek and astra among those.
This thread is not about that. It is off topic. But what is you holding back opening a new thread?
So? The FDA is very simply not to be trusted because they work together WITH the Pharmaceutical Companies.
So make it make sense. From what i read it was excrement. You can sit here and tell me i don't understand. But that's your failure to communicate.O yes it does. Don't you really don't understand that?
Well no **** sherlock The "D" in FDA stands for drugs, aka pharmaceuticals.It is very simple. FDA AND Pharmaceutical Companies are connected.
So what?There is no independent research at all.
I don't think it would be. What would be interesting is what evidence supported approval. Clearly it isn't money.Thanks for that.
4 per year rejections over the last 3 or 4 years does not seem many. More interesting might be how many applications were made, and how many were approved.
I don't know what you are talking about.No data on if any person is ever sanctioned for "off label" prescribing, making it appear that nobody ever is held responsible for such a violation.
Translation: You have no defense to his post so you are just going to avoid it. How very CTer of you.This thread is not about that. It is off topic. But what is you holding back opening a new thread?