SSRI-fueled hatred

Post Reply New Topic

There's been a lot of research that suggests SSRIs do more harm than good. I would seriously suggest talking to your doctor about it. I don't think you can stop taking them cold turkey and you need to be weaned, and you may have a hard time getting a doctor to agree to let you off of it if you just started because doctors may say that it takes 30 days for it to start with the effects, which isn't always true but you know doctors.

Empirical Studies on Continual Medication

According to Burt (2002), from 1985-1999, doctor visits by patients increased 19% while prescriptions increased 59% with psychiatrists showing the largest increase for a specialized field with drug mentions increasing from 82% to 178% and antidepressants accounting for 13.5% of that increase. The largest increase of drugs for patients with ages 15-24 was for prescriptions that affect the central nervous system to include SSRIs and methylphenidate, which was the most frequent drug prescribed in 1999 for that class. In that time period, FDA approvals doubled decreasing approval times from an average of three years to one year. In 1985, 35% of the doctor visits were paid for by the patient whereas in 1999, only 5% paid for their visits showing an increase in health insurance. In addition, in 1998 and 1999, Lipitor was heavily marketed during that time with an increase in 50% of prescriptions for the said drug. While no correlation was proven, statistics reveal a trend in the increase of prescription drugs for a 14-year period.

According to a study by the University of Michigan, 30% of the children on SSRIs were also taking stimulants. Boys were three times more likely than girls to be on stimulants; however, no difference in gender was noted for SSRIs. (Gavin, 2000).

Studies show a trend in the increase of psychotropic medications; however, medicines such as SSRIs and stimulants produce adverse side effects (Sharav, 2004). With the media slamming these drugs on a regular basis, one can only speculate why these trends still exist. Possibly some other types of studies can shed a little light on the dark subject.

According to Sharav (2004), the Food and Drug Administration produced two Acts: The Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 and extended version of Better Pharmaceuticals for Children Act of 2002. In these acts, sizable financial incentives and patent extensions were given to companies who performed drug research on children. Specialists in trials earned over a million a year. In addition, regardless of laws and acts stating unethical to do so, physicians still received 2-5 thousand dollars for each child referred to trials. Since these Acts, child research participants grew from 16,000 in 1997 to 45,000 in 2001. Adverse side effects often times remain unreported. In Pfizer (1996) clinical study on sertraline (Zoloft), 9% of the children tested attempted suicide (as cited in Sharav). One of those cases mutilated himself before his attempt; however, the published report said, "Sertraline was well tolerated by both child and adolescent patients" (as cited in Sharav).

A couple studies (Campbell, Gruen, Mountford, Miller, Cleary, & Blumenthal, 2007; Wazana, 2000) on the relationships between pharmaceutical industries and physicians have uncovered ethical issues regarding how much influence a bias source such as the pharmaceutical companies have on healthcare in the United States. In 2000, Dr. Wazana performed a meta-analysis on 29 studies addressing interactions, attitudes, and effects of interactions between physicians and industry. According to Wazana (2000), pharmaceutical companies spend over five billion dollars each year in marketing estimating an average of $10,000 for each physician annually. One of the studies she researched found that while the majority of medical students thought it unethical for politicians to accept gifts, about half thought it was unethical for themselves to do the same. The study's results were categorized by interactions between physicians and the industry, attitudes towards the interactions, and effects on behavior. Regarding interactions, they start in medical school averaging four times a month. While certain benefits such as meals and samples decreased as they entered practice, increases in benefits like honoraria, conference travel, and research funding were noted. Regarding attitudes, most physicians were skeptical about the intentions of the sales representatives; however, most also believed the information they received to be accurate and admitted that without the benefits, they were less apt to continue interactions. Most physicians believed in banning pharmaceutical speakers. In addition, samples, continuing education, and travel funding were considered more influential than promotional materials. Regarding behavior, an independent association existed between interactions and "formulary addition requests" for represented drugs (even if they didn't have any advantages over other drugs) and prescribing behavior. Samples were associated with prescription practice and positive attitudes. Sponsored meals and acceptance of symposium funding were associated with "formulary addition requests for any drug." Pharmaceutical speakers inspired an inaccurate view of drugs, and the attendance of pharmaceutical representatives during rounds were associated with "inappropriate treatment decisions."

In a study by Campbell, Gruen, Mountford, Miller, Cleary, & Blumenthal (2007), a new study similar to Wazana (2000) took place in an effort to see if new codes and standards had any effect on the said behaviors. According to the survey that took place from November 2003 to June 2004, most physicians received gifts and samples. Over a third received reimbursed costs for meetings and continuing education while over a quarter received payments for services such as consulting, speaking, serving on an advisory board, and enrolling patients in clinical trials. Cardiologists were highly likely to receive payments as well as physicians in group practices were highly likely to receive samples, gifts, and payments. Family Practitioners reported the most interactions with the industry with an average of 16 meetings per month (four times of what Wazana, 2000 reported).

According to an article in the New York Times, Psychiatrists were the top receiver of benefits more than any other specialty (Harris, 2007).

In a study by Petroshius, Titus, & Hatch (1995), advertising from pharmaceutical companies to consumers (bi-passing doctors) had an effect on physicians. Surveys were requested from 250 physicians in Ohio, Michigan, and Indiana by their pharmaceutical sales representative, and 148 participated. Physicians practicing 20+ years were less influenced and favorable towards the advertising. The younger physicians in urban settings were more influenced. Attitudes had an impact on prescribing behavior.

In consideration of these studies, it is very possible that some of the reasons for the behavior indicated could be contributed to the pharmaceutical industry.

References

Bender, W. N., Shubert, T. H., McLauchlin, P. J. (2001). Invisible kids: Preventing school violence by identifying kids in trouble. Intervention in School & Clinic, 37, 105+

Burt, C. W. (2002). National trends in use of medications in office-based practice, 1985-1999. Health Affairs, 21(4), 206-214.

Campbell, E. G., Gruen, R. L., Mountford, J., Miller, L. G., Cleary, P. D., & Blumenthal, D. (2007). A national survey of physician-industry relationships. The New England Journal of Medicine, 356, 1742-1750.

Chappell, M., Casey, D., De la Cruz, C., Ferrell, J., Forman, J., Lipkin, R., et al. (2004) Bullying in college by students and teachers. Adolescence, 39(153), 53+.

Charles Andrew Williams. (2007). Wikipedia. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Andrew_Williams

Citizens Commission on Human Rights. (2006). Psychiatric drugs and anger management curricula: A perspective on school violence. Retrieved August 8, 2007, from http://www.cchr.org/files/14552/Violenc ... 0Paper.pdf

Classes resume Monday after middle school shooting: Teachers mourn slain colleague. (1998, April 26). Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://edition.cnn.com/US/9804/26/teach ... index.html

Dedman, B. (2000, October 15). Deadly lessons-school shooters: Secret service findings. Chicago Sun-Times. Retrieved August 8, 2007, from http://www.knowgangs.com/school_resoure ... essons.pdf

Fugh-Berman, A., & Ahari, S. (2007). Following the script: How drug reps make friends and influence doctors. PLOS Medicine, 4, 621-625.

Gavin, K. (2000). Ritalin and Prozac: Study finds more kids using both drug types together. Retrieved August 6, 2007, from
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_release/2 ... 105100.php

Goodstein, L., & Glaberson, W. (2000, April 10). The well-marked roads to homicidal rage. The New York Times. Retrieved August 8, 2007, from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... gewanted=1

Harris, G. (2007, June 27). Psychiatrists top list in drug maker gifts. The New York Times. Retrieved August 6, 2007, from http://www.nytimes.com

Johnson, P. (2000). How schools are making big money on 'ADD/ADHD'. Retrieved August 6, 2007, from http://www.rense.com/general4/addd.htm

Langford, J. R. (1995, October 22). South Carolina Bureau, p. A01.

Lindsay, D. M. (2003, October 4). Youth on the edge: A profile of American teens. The Christian Century, 120(20), 26+.

McGee, J. P., & DeBernardo, C. R. (1999). The classroom avenger: A behavioral profile of school based shootings. Forensic Examiner, 8 (5-6), 16-18.

O'Meara, K. P. (1999, June 28). Doping kids. Insight on the News, 15 (24), 10.

Petroshius, S. M., Titus, P. A., & Hatch, K. J. (1995). Physician attitudes toward pharmaceutical drug advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 35(6), 41+.

PubMed CYP2D6 Studies. (n.d.). Retrieved August 8, 2007, from http://www.antidepressantsfacts.com/p-4 ... tudies.htm

Rage: A look at a teen killer. (2001, March 7). CBS News. Retrieved August 8, 2007, from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1999/08/ ... 8625.shtml

Ramsey v. State. (2002). Retrieved August 6, 2007, from http://touchngo.com/ap/html/ap-1832.htm.

Salaman, M. K. (2006). The medicating of America. Retrieved August 7, 2007, from the National Health Federation web site: http://www.thenhf.com/health_freedom_news_56.htm

Santrock, J. W. (2007). Child Development (11th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Sharav, V. H. (2004). Conflicts of interest in biomedical research harm children with and without disabilities. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 15, 50+.

Thomas, S. P., & Smith, H. (2004). School connectedness, anger behaviors, and relationships of violent and nonviolent American youth. Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, 40 (4), 135+.

U.S. Bills & Resolutions introduced or passed against coercive Psychiatric labeling and drugging of children. (n.d.). Retrieved August 8, 2007, from http://www.fightforkids.org/bills_and_resolutions.html

Wazana, A. (2000). Physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: Is a gift ever just a gift. JAMA, 283(3), 373-380.

It really ticks me off about the SSRI's and the research I read on it. It just goes to show that might is right I guess, at least when it comes to money.

Anyway, for those interested, I posted my college paper I did where I found research on it. The paper wasn't about SSRIs, but about any possibility of a correlation between school shooters and psychotropic medication. The research was pretty weak for that argument as the research really doesn't exist. Nobody that I could find ever did a study to correlate it. But, one study where they ruled it out was based on faulty information that I corrected with other research which was pretty cool. Anyway, the link... Warning, it's a very long paper, but there is a portion on SSRIs in the category "What we Truly Know" and subcategory of "Empirical studies on continual medication"... Also, I set it up as adult material because the subject content IMO is too mature. Since it may ask you to log in, I'm just going to also copy and paste the thing on SSRIs on here too, but the whole paper is at
http://www.squidoo.com/schoolshooting

Yeah sure. I posted it on a squidoo lense for the world to have it available. I was actually upset when the teacher gave me a 100% A on the paper but didn't pick it for publication. So it's my way to freely self publish
We're talking about this very thing on a different message board where I admin - would it be okay with you if I post it up there as it is very interesting?

please!