Slashdot Mirror


Are Psychiatric Medications Hurting More Patients Than They Help? (scientificamerican.com)

An anonymous reader quotes Scientific American's Cross-Check blog: Two new posts on this website have me contemplating, once again, the terrible possibility that psychiatry is hurting more people than it helps. Reporter Sarah G. Miller notes in "1 in 6 Americans Takes a Psychiatric Drug" that prescriptions for mental illness keep surging. As of 2013, almost 17 percent of Americans were taking at least one psychiatric drug, up from 10 percent in 2011, according to a new study. "Antidepressants were the most common type of psychiatric drug in the survey, with 12 percent of adults reporting that they filled prescriptions for these drugs..."

This increase in medications must be boosting our mental health, right? Wrong. In "Is Mental Health Declining in the U.S.?," Edmund S. Higgins, professor of psychiatry at the Medical University of South Carolina, acknowledges the "inconvenient truth" that Americans' mental health has, according to some measures, deteriorated...

It's all more evidence of something their blogger wrote in 2012. "American psychiatry, in collusion with the pharmaceutical industry, may be perpetrating the biggest case of iatrogenesis -- harmful medical treatment -- in history."

432 comments

  1. Good question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Let's ask APK...

    1. Re:Good question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..or an SJW.

    2. Re:Good question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    3. Re:Good question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apk is addicted to opiate painkillers.

    4. Re:Good question by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 2

      The headline, as is far too comon for /., is incorrect/misleading/clickbait. If it was corrected to read:

      Is overprescription of psychiatric medication as is done in the US harmful?

      then the answer is a pretty obvious "yes". Many (most?) other countries use therapy first and medication only as a last resort. In the US its medication, medication, money, medication, money... sorry, got the two a bit mixed up there.

    5. Re:Good question by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You can try to cure me by throwing money at me any time you like.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re: Good question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a line where some people do need medications. People who legitimately need them to stop them killing themselves. These people need to be admitted and people, family & friends see changed behaviors.
      These people actually have altered brains. ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1863557/ )

      Then there are people who are down on life for a short while. Maybe a loved one has passed or they lost a job, divorce, empty nest... these people need a boost for a short while. There are online mental health programs which doctor's can recommend and work ( I know because my spouse) used. They can talk to counsellors. They can be on meds for a relatively short time.

      Then there are the drama queens. They need a slap in the head like Gibb's does on NCIS to bring them back to reality and out of their entitled demands.

  2. Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Duh. Off the rails on a crazy train...

    1. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Duh. Off the rails on a crazy train...

      Funny that the writer of that song is one of the most self medicate people alive until recently (if you believe he is finally off drugs, he has calmed to have gone clean many times before.) Somehow he survives all this too.. amazing. Years ago I remember singing my own lyrics to the song "Flying High Again" and instead singing "Doing Drugs Again!"

    2. Re: Duh. by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      I knew it, Ozzy must be involved somewhere.

      But the drugs just takes care of the symptoms to some extent. Not the cause. We need to dig deeper.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    3. Re: Duh. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But the drugs just takes care of the symptoms to some extent. Not the cause. We need to dig deeper.

      Kind of hard to dig deeper if the person is overwhelmed by the symptoms. If someone wants to kill themselves today, you don't want to risk taking 3 months of therapy to try to get to the bottom of their problems. Also, finding the cause doesn't necessarily fix everything. The brain is plastic. Every time a person goes through a bout of depression, it increases the odds of another bout irrespective of the cause.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    4. Re: Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's more fun to make up lyrics that aren't synonymous with the originals.

    5. Re: Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      deeper means how we are living.

    6. Re: Duh. by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      Kind of hard to dig deeper if the person is overwhelmed by the symptoms. If someone wants to kill themselves today, you don't want to risk taking 3 months of therapy to try to get to the bottom of their problems.

      If it takes you 3 months, go find a job you don't suck at. It never takes me more than an hour.

      Also, finding the cause doesn't necessarily fix everything.

      Yes. You actually need to treat the cause and your average therapist doesn't know much about that.

    7. Re: Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kind of hard to dig deeper if the person is overwhelmed by the symptoms. If someone wants to kill themselves today, you don't want to risk taking 3 months of therapy to try to get to the bottom of their problems.

      If it takes you 3 months, go find a job you don't suck at. It never takes me more than an hour.

      Also, finding the cause doesn't necessarily fix everything.

      Yes. You actually need to treat the cause and your average therapist doesn't know much about that.

      So you assume that
      1. All depression comes from unemployment
      2. One can "find a job [they] don't suck at". In less than 3 months (in an hour??)?
      3. (Bonus round) You're implying that you know better than "your average therapist" oh, do go on.

    8. Re: Duh. by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      What I mean is that most often just the meds are prescribed and nothing else happens. No tests that checks if there's an underlying cause like out of balance thyroid etc. Doctors are too focused on their special area that they don't want to admit that the problem may be relieved better and faster if there's a root cause examination as well.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    9. Re: Duh. by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      Re: 1 & 2 -- I'm referring to the therapist.
      Re 3, I hope so, been doing this professionally for 20 years.

    10. Re: Duh. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Meds are cheaper than therapists. Proper mental health treatment tends to take a lot of professional hours, whereas proper physical health treatment generally requires a lot fewer, and treatments are less expensive. If you're trying to run a health system on the cheap, cutting back on talk therapy (which should be used with the meds, for clinical depression) saves a lot of money.

      As far as the root cause goes, it would be wonderful to find a treatable root cause, but we don't understand mental illness nearly well enough for that in most cases. Depression, to stick to what I know, is diagnosed as a combination of self-reported symptoms, and progress is measured by self-reporting. There's probably multiple causes, only some of them benefiting from anti-depressants, but it's cheaper to throw a prescription at someone than to understand and heal them.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    11. Re: Duh. by jsh1972 · · Score: 1

      The warnings on antidepressant for suicidal ideation comes from the fact that when you're severely depressed and the antidepressant start to work you actually get a little motivation. The lack of motivation in deep depression might have kept you from jumping off that bridge but once they start to work and you have motivation but haven't been working long enough to help the depression you just like find the energy to do it.

  3. Of course not. by ilsaloving · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The balance sheets for the various drug companies clearly state that everything is just fine.

    1. Re:Of course not. by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh, good, pseudo intellectual cynicism has dismissed the whole topic. No need to discuss this, ilsaloving has seen through all of the smoke bombs and has clearly articulated the fundamental explanation.

      Enjoy the karma boost you get from people who only want to reward opinions matching their own.

    2. Re:Of course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ditto

    3. Re:Of course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The issue is damn complicated, which an overwhelming number of variables. Looking at only two variables: a rise in depression and a rise in antidepressant drug use, is criminally unscientific.

      I see a lot of in-recent-decades cultural shifts that can easily explain a rise in depression. For example, once upon a time one could get married and have a reasonable expectation of remaining married until death. These days, the divorce revolution has left enormous numbers of adults alone and lonely, and kids being raised in broken homes. The dating world is characterized by selfishness and manipulation rather than long-term mate seeking.

      Revelations about how the government has been betraying our trust is leaving everyone without faith in their leaders.

      The ongoing elimination of the middle class is pushing ever greater numbers of people down into the lower classes, with no realistic hope of climbing up.

      Why would anyone expect depression rates to go down in an environment like this?

    4. Re:Of course not. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 0

      Take your meds.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    5. Re:Of course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was watching an interview with as escapee from North Korea and he said one of the more interesting things he has noticed is people in North Korea smiled and laughed more than people in South Korea. He said that overall, people in North Korea seemed more happy. Money can't buy happiness.

    6. Re:Of course not. by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      Thanks! I was feeling great until I read your depressing post. Now I'm too depressed to even get up out of my chair.

    7. Re:Of course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One wonders why he bothered escaping in the first place?

    8. Re: Of course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      From what I understand, in California, there have been more wildfires, and more use of water to fight them. What is the water industry hiding?!

    9. Re:Of course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'll explain his comment to you, which if you already understood the interaction between pharmaceutical companies and the FDA, would need no explanation.

      The FDA does not have resources nor funds to actively regulate/test pharmaceutical drugs, they hand off the testing results to be done by the drug companies themselves as a result through a "third party". The drug companies subsidize the "third party" to test the drug and unless the drug is an absolute complete failure, drug companies can take sample tests from a large set of tests to reinforce that the drug is "safe". (even if the majority of a data set shows severe or fatal side effects). A drug company can spend years from R&D to finished product and hundreds of millions of dollars to finalize the product. This encourages a level of desperation for the drug companies to protect their investment, even if lawsuits come up later. Any settlements will equal less than the money dumped into creating the drug, so why not?

      Thousands of people have died as an immediate result of the broken drug regulation system (you have the internet -- see banned drugs and death counts). What's even worse is some of these fatal drugs stay on the market for over 20 years before being banned.

      Don't even get me started on all the f***ed up sociological and economic latent effects that cause emotional detriment to the civilian population. Average people are turned depressive by their environment if genetics weren't already in play. US workers work more, get less vacation, pay more for healthcare, eat poorly, live in more debt, and live under a government that is fundamentally broken and is underfunded only because it's guilty of poorly allocating tax dollars and dumping money into either defunct government programs or military spending (don't forget our taxes are still paying for those bank bailouts in the 2000s) and our nation allows corporations to dump money into political decisions because the government needs the funds and businesses need to continue operating.

      This isn't even cynicism, it's realism. People hold so much faith in institutions that don't have the capacity to operate as well as they're publicly perceived and we'll all slowly pay the price with our overall happiness..

    10. Re:Of course not. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      Oh, good, pseudo intellectual cynicism has dismissed the whole topic. No need to discuss this, ilsaloving has seen through all of the smoke bombs and has clearly articulated the fundamental explanation.

      Enjoy the karma boost you get from people who only want to reward opinions matching their own.

      Dood! It was a joke! Jeesh - you forget to take your meds or something?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    11. Re: Of course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The issue is damn complicated, which an overwhelming number of variables."

      Thank you. This is absolutely correct.

      The rise in mental illnesses has little correlation to the prescribing of pharmaceutical meds. Do the meds cause problems? Absolutely. Are they helpful? Sometimes. Are the meds over-prescribed? Without a doubt.

      But the argument in this article is reductionistic and convolutes the issues involved. The meds, in and of themselves, did not give rise to the overall increase in the decline of mental health. To make such a claim shows only the ignorance of the author.

    12. Re:Of course not. by gtall · · Score: 1

      Damn, I wish I could mod you up.

    13. Re:Of course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He said he was happy, but he was not allowed to follow his dreams. Being alive was not enough, being able to do what you love to do is worth getting your entire family killed. Punishment for getting caught is death, along with all of your family up to your grandparents. Yeah, don't get caught.

    14. Re:Of course not. by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

      because he wanted food?

    15. Re: Of course not. by wierd_w · · Score: 2

      I wouldnt say it is complicated, only that it is the result of unpleasant truths.

      There major form of psychoactives used in the US is that of anti-depressant medications, used for various kinds of depression and anxiety disorders.

      Take that, along with some scary findings ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... ) that the US's "PRODUCE MORE NOW! WITH LESS THAN YOU DID LAST QUARTER, OBEY OR BE FIRED! DO NOT DARE ASK FOR MORE THAN THE 1-WEEK OF VACATION ALLOTED TO YOU! CORPORATE HAS SPOKEN!" culture produces unbearable levels of stress, which increases risk for depression. ( http://www.mayoclinic.org/heal... )

      The obvious low hanging fruit to investigate is workplace related stress causing anxiety disorders and other mental disorders, such as dementia. (https://www.alzheimers.org.uk/site/scripts/documents_info.php?documentID=1744 )

      But somehow, this is "Damn complicated", because damnit, without slavedriving people, how will americans be cost effective compared to foreign labor and developing economies!? How will C-level assfucks get to feel good about themselve without driving the company lexus or taking rides in the corporate jet!?

      The problem is that the world values money and wealth more than health and happiness, just not in the way that the GGP suggested with the quip about balance reports-- but it was pretty close to the mark, even if he did not know it.

      Yes, "damn complicated", because "Damnit, I want my gold-encrusted jet to rival Donald Trumps!" and not "complicated" because "There isnt a glaringly obvious common factor massively contributing to poor american mental health."

    16. Re:Of course not. by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I see a lot of in-recent-decades cultural shifts that can easily explain a rise in depression.

      I wouldn't exactly dispute the gist of your claims, but I think the relevant psychological factor has little to do with your trends.

      People in the past may not have divorced as much, but how much has infidelity actually risen? How much has "kids being raised in broken homes" risen compared to, say, rate of child abuse if you go back more than a couple generations? People used to whip their kids. You had pre-adolescents working in coal mines. Everybody (including kids) used to be basically slightly inebriated most of the time, back when water was frequently unsafe and the carrier of disease... so drunken beatings were pretty much normal.

      Family situations were undeniably a lot worse back in the "good ole days." Even in the 1950s or whatever "golden age" of the American middle class family you might imagine from Leave it to Beaver, a significant number of people were taking some sort of crap for a "pick me up" that we'd conflate with drug use today.

      Main difference: we didn't TALK about this stuff as much, outside of town gossip. We lamented the stories of the folks "on the other side of the tracks," and those people lamented the stories of the REALLY poor folks they knew. Today, we all lament our own situations.

      Or, you talk about leaders as if corruption in politics were new. 'Twas always thus, but perhaps we didn't TALK about it as much.

      Or, you talk about the decline of middle class numbers. Yeah, it's a bad trend. But, if we're going to talk about history, even most "poor" people in a place like the U.S. today are living with conditions leagues ahead of the "middle class" a couple centuries back.

      I'd bet if you took a bunch of middle-class American folk and took them back to the 17th century and let them even lead a reasonably "upper-class" life then, a significant number would just commit suicide within a year... whereas the 17th-century folks were perfectly happy with what they had.

      Why would anyone expect depression rates to go down in an environment like this?

      I wouldn't exactly expect depression rates to go down, but I do think they're rather unpredictable based on objective living conditions of a population. There have been quite a few studies looking at "happiness" in more "primitive" cultures around the world and realizing that satisfaction and happiness have relatively little to do with anything objective, and a lot to do with your own perception of your life and the world around you.

      Your post is a good example of the way narratives of cynicism and outright pessimism have taken over the way many people perceive themselves and their lives today. They turn on the news and they don't hear "Murder rate continues 1000+-year trend downward!" or even that murder rates or child abduction rates or whatever have fallen a lot in the past couple generations. Instead, they hear about bad stuff happening today or this week or this year. CONSTANTLY.

      I am NOT arguing that we just bury our heads in the sand and ignore the news, but there is a lot of truth in the statement "Ignorance is Bliss."

      If you thought about your examples a little more, you'd realize this is even encoded in your own "data." Why do people get divorced so often today, for example? Generally, it's because they claim to be "unhappy," and they think doing something else will make things better. Except the data shows they are MOSTLY WRONG. Divorce rates for second marriages are something like 66%; divorce rates for third marriages are close to 75%.

      If people actually knew what "made them happy" and were capable of seeking it out rationally, the divorce rate should go down with more experience in marriages. Instead it goes up.

      The issue is that people are not objective about their own experiences. They are mostly incapable of making objective assessments of how their sit

    17. Re: Of course not. by fferreres · · Score: 1

      People has less hope today that in the past. Just look how many in gen X have no saving to retire, how baby boomers are still working and hiw millenials trust more in propaganda like transformer, Jarvis or x-men than in something more profound. You can still be very happy, but if you want just take a look at suicide rates which climed 24% since 1999 and are at 30-years records. Many more people take that sad desperate route today than before, and aomething is causing it. Woman are especially vulnerable, more so older woman which now commit auicide 64% more often than before. The problem you have is that you see this as a debate. There is no debate about what is happening. My guess is anti-pressants are a band aid, and since the root problem is never assessed, many times the right diagnosis or treatment arrives way too late when too much harm has clouded the body. I had people that really went through really harsh times, and the beat advise is to go out meet people, pray and exercise.

      --
      unfinished: (adj.)
    18. Re: Of course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah. Good old drunken beatings. Those I miss most of all. The feel of the belt buckle hitting your skin. Sometimes bone. The cracking sound my fingers would make if my hands got in the way. And crawling into the corner pleading please stop I won't take the peanut butter again.

      The good old days.

    19. Re:Of course not. by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

      Was it? Because people really think like this, and you're not the person I replied to. How certain are you?

    20. Re:Of course not. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      Was it? Because people really think like this, and you're not the person I replied to. How certain are you?

      Oh, goodness, let's dissect this for a minute. He wrote:

      The balance sheets for the various drug companies clearly state that everything is just fine.

      Okay. So we have a discussion about psychiatric drugs possibly doing more harm than good. So he took the contrary statement that the group who profits the most from them says that isn't the case. Then note that instead of citing research, he cites balance sheets. That's an example of incongruous sentece writing. And th ekicker is that as humor, it is cynical yet funny.

      But as cynical belief? The boys down at the shop call that damn dumb, and I call it a non sequitur. I pretty much agree that especially children are drugged to keep them in line. And I completely believe that the cynical humor OP wrote lines up with my believe, not because of confirmation bias, but because it makes more sense than a person stating that a measurement of profit or loss is the determining factor.

      But hey - if you want to start frothing at the mouth, be my guess.

      And ps's We can all see the posts people make, so if you want to have a totally private conversation, you two will need to take it to private email. People can post on other people's comments, it's kind the basic premise of Slashdot.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    21. Re: Of course not. by west · · Score: 2

      > Take that, along with some scary findings that the US's "PRODUCE MORE NOW! WITH LESS THAN YOU DID LAST QUARTER, OBEY OR BE FIRED! DO NOT DARE ASK FOR MORE THAN THE 1-WEEK OF VACATION ALLOTED TO YOU! CORPORATE HAS SPOKEN!" culture produces unbearable levels of stress, which increases risk for depression.

      Well, there's the small problem that the US (and the rest of the industrialized world) has a standard of living many times the rest of the world. To sustain that, we need to be many times more productive than the rest of the world. And that is becoming harder and harder.

      We're going crazy trying to stave off the Great Reckoning, when the developed world median income falls into place with the rest of the world. So, yeah, we're a little stressed. Who wouldn't be? But personally, I don't blame anybody but myself. Once we accept we can't stop water from flowing downhill, and accept a 75% drop in income, (and survive the stress from *that*), the pressure to produce 4x what everyone else in the world produces will be off.

      And yet... somehow, I keep fighting that day, pushing it off for just one more year, mental health be damned.

    22. Re:Of course not. by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      Of all the Soft sciences, only Finance has a lower credibility score.

    23. Re: Of course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      of course you do

      that's also exactly what the previous generation did, too

    24. Re:Of course not. by tsa · · Score: 1

      I always wonder why sarcasm is so hard for nerds to understand.

      --

      -- Cheers!

    25. Re: Of course not. by Z00L00K · · Score: 2

      And what's added to the water used?

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    26. Re:Of course not. by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      He said he was happy, but he was not allowed to follow his dreams. Being alive was not enough, being able to do what you love to do is worth getting your entire family killed.

      In this case, I'd have to question his definition of happiness. If I am not following my dreams and doing things that interest me, at least to some extent, then I can't really say I'm happy.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    27. Re: Of course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depression unhappy.

      If you are discussing 'depression' in the clinical sense, substitute the word 'cancer' and if the resulting statement sound stupid,your original will too.

    28. Re: Of course not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The water industry?

    29. Re: Of course not. by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the world values money and wealth more than health and happiness

      This, right here.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    30. Re:Of course not. by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      People used to whip their kids.

      Err...people don't whip their kids today?

      Perhaps that's the problem we have with so many kids today, with no respect for elders, laws, socially accepted behavior or often even basic respect for life.

      I know a lot of kids don't receive corporal punishment, but I didn't think that was the norm across most parents....?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    31. Re:Of course not. by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

      As the original poster, yes, it was supposed to be a joke. I figured someone was gonna go off about it anyway, so I wanted to whore the +5 funny mod for myself. while short circuiting the mouth-frothing.

      Apparently I accidentally tripped over Poe's Law.

    32. Re:Of course not. by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Or, you talk about the decline of middle class numbers. Yeah, it's a bad trend. But, if we're going to talk about history, even most "poor" people in a place like the U.S. today are living with conditions leagues ahead of the "middle class" a couple centuries back.

      A couple of centuries ago? Try a couple of decades ago. I once found a study of the costs and possessions of the "middle class" in the 1950's. Homes were much smaller on average. Food and clothing costs were double what they are now. Most people only had one weeks worth of clothes. The dad got bacon and eggs and the kids got oatmeal because the family could not afford to feed the entire family bacon and eggs, thus the breadwinner got it. The 50's were not looked so fondly upon because they were so great, but because it was a general uplifting during the decade. Over that decade wages increased sigificantly. Electric appliances that were labor saving devices freed up lots of time where before the wife couldn't get a job also because of the literal amount of time it takes to do everything around the house without any appliances or pre-made foods. I suspect most people today in America, if they had to live like the middle class in 1950, would claim they were living like it was during the Great Depression. And the Great Depression would be what we consider apocalyptic today with families starving to death.

    33. Re:Of course not. by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Thank God someone said this. I've gotten sick of the "pseudo-intellectual cynicism" as you put it over ever topic, cynics who don't want to think about any particular topic and sure as HELL don't want to admit any topic could have shades of grey, or that each side has their own motivations and might actually have good points.

    34. Re: Of course not. by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      From what I understand, in California, there have been more wildfires, and more use of water to fight them. What is the water industry hiding?!

      And no water to put the fires out or pipe to peoples' homes either!

    35. Re:Of course not. by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Your post is a good example of the way narratives of cynicism and outright pessimism have taken over the way many people perceive themselves and their lives today. They turn on the news and they don't hear "Murder rate continues 1000+-year trend downward!" or even that murder rates or child abduction rates or whatever have fallen a lot in the past couple generations. Instead, they hear about bad stuff happening today or this week or this year. CONSTANTLY.

      CmdrTaco recently retweeted this interesting article Five Things You Notice When You Quit the News. I do not agree with some of their premises (like their assertion that knowing what's going on in the world or country is not important for the average person), but it has some interesting things to say about negativity bias.

    36. Re:Of course not. by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      People used to whip their kids.

      Err...people don't whip their kids today?

      Perhaps that's the problem we have with so many kids today, with no respect for elders, laws, socially accepted behavior or often even basic respect for life.

      I know a lot of kids don't receive corporal punishment, but I didn't think that was the norm across most parents....?

      I know for sure in my case that harsh punishments when I was young led to a rebellious streak. I only got angrier.
      I think it's a totally-unsupported trope that corporal punishment leads to more "respect" for the system.

    37. Re: Of course not. by jsh1972 · · Score: 1

      Chemtrail mix

  4. Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Alsn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In happiness charts, Denmark continues to score the highest while they also have the highest prescription rate of antidepressants in the world.

    Not saying Denmark is some shining beacon of mental health but the problem is quite simply harder to diagnose than to correlate psychiatric drug prescriptions and mental health stats. More serious studies are definitely needed.

    1. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure if I didn't have my antidepressants, I would have seriuosly hurt myself or someone else a long time ago. When life feels like shit, you want to take everyone down with you.

    2. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by bmo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe it's because in Denmark, you can go to school and get a stipend on top of it. Also, there isn't a race-to-the-bottom with wages. Also, there is a social and medical safety net.

      And bars don't close at 1am like they do here.

      --
      BMO

      "I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy."

    3. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not fix what makes people unhappy instead?

      Nah, that'd be communist, we can't have that!

    4. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Alsn · · Score: 1

      You're on to something, of course. However, my point was that things like these are way more complicated than what the title/summary suggests. You can't just take two articles that *seem* to contradict each other and conclude that the contradiction must be true. It is entirely possible (and I'd argue likely) that the problem is much more complicated than that.

    5. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Funny

      More serious studies are definitely needed.

      No more studies are necessary. The answer is perfectly clear: Bacon. Those Danes produce lots of it! Even the venerable "The Economist" takes note of that:

      "Denmark is a tiny country, with 5.6m people and wallet-draining labour costs. But it is an agricultural giant, home to 30m pigs and a quiverful of global brands. In 2011 farm products made up 20% of its goods exports. The value of food exports grew from €4 billion ($5.5 billion) in 2001 to €16.1 billion in 2011. The government expects it to rise by a further €6.7 billion by 2020." http://www.economist.com/news/...

      All that happiness-bringing bacon cancels out all those depressing, but brilliant, Lars Von Trier films.

      Not saying Denmark is some shining beacon of mental health

      Not saying Denmark is some shining bacon of mental health

      FTFY

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    6. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Why not fix what makes people unhappy instead?

      The people being treated with antidepressants are mostly suffering from clinical depression, which is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain. It has little to do with external factors. Likewise with antipsychotics. Long ago it was believed that schizophrenia was caused by "bad parenting" (cold domineering mothers and psychologically detached fathers). That has been utterly debunked. The cause is mostly determined by genetics and prenatal nutrition. If one of an identical twin has schizophrenia, the other is not guaranteed to have it, but is fifty times more likely than chance. If only one suffers, or one suffers more severely, it is very likely to be the one with a lower birth weight. Whether the twins are raised together or separated at birth makes no difference at all.

    7. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Princeofcups · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe it's because in Denmark, you can go to school and get a stipend on top of it. Also, there isn't a race-to-the-bottom with wages. Also, there is a social and medical safety net.

      And bars don't close at 1am like they do here.

      --
      BMO

      "I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy."

      This shows again a COMPLETE lack of understanding mental health. Sure there is a social component. But the drugs are not meant to deal with that. That's what therapy is for. Drugs are used to mitigate a lack of certain neurochemicals in the brain, a PHYSICAL condition. Without a proper balance of serotonin, dopamine, norepinephrine, etc., normal everyday functioning can become impossible. The main issue is when MD's without psychiatric training started prescribing these drugs. "Try this and come back in two weeks" can work with a rash, but not with mental health. Finding the right drugs titrated at the right dosages requires direct interaction between patient and doctor, and probably therapy to understand the social and mental effects of the underlying physical issues.

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    8. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YOU are the one showing a complete lack of understanding of mental health.

      When society isnt a shit heap, people actually do tend to be happier. Cause you know.... there's less to get depressed about?

    9. Re: Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Genetics is one factor, but external stuff may also play a role. Bromides in our drinking water pushes out iodine which the thyroid needs and without sufficient iodine levels the thyroid can't produce enough of the necessary hormones T3 and T4, which can cause a lot of symptoms including depression.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    10. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It isn't as if outside conditions don't affect neurochemicals, and, as that Rat Park experiment has shown, outside conditions can affect propensity toward addiction. IE: Give people in a shit environment drugs like Xanax (among others), and they are more prone to misuse it. At that point it's a mental health hindrance, and not helper. And it isn't as if revoking the Rx stops everyone, some who before wouldn't have, now turn to the streets. Just look at all these articles on opiate addiction stats lately. Cracking down on pill mills doesn't solve the underlying problem, and some reform efforts even stop legitimate high functioning patients from continuing therapy that had been working for them. Disclosure: I do not take any psychoactive Rx drugs, these are just things I've noticed over the years.

    11. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by mukinrestak · · Score: 1

      1AM?! Dear god I'm sorry. I haven't even been to a bar in years, but I can still REMEMBER my twenties and bars that stayed open past 4.

    12. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      YOU are the one showing a complete lack of understanding of mental health.

      When society isnt a shit heap, people actually do tend to be happier. Cause you know.... there's less to get depressed about?

      And how do you propose to fix society so it's not a "shit heap?" Extra points if you can also figure out what we should do with people with mental disorders until you "fix society?" How are you going to make it that nobody is in a bad relationship, loses their job, has a catastrophic medical event that significantly impacts their daily lives, and nobody experiences inconsolable grief over someone close to them dying?

      Two people can be in identical circumstances, one gets depressed, the other doesn't. Same with PTSD and other anxiety disorders - some people are more susceptible than others. It's not as simple as you seem to think it is. And if you tell someone to "just pull yourself out of it", you deserve it when they punch you in the face.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    13. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While all that is nice, no one has the tens of thousands of dollars necessary for all that let alone the ability to take off work for more than a few days a year due to medical treatment.

      So we soldier on as we are and ignore your worthless idealism.

    14. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Sorry to burst your bubble but neurochemistry is really at the 'try this for two weeks and come back to see me'. Even if you are a Board Certified (TM) psychiatrist. We really are at the very beginning of understanding what the brain is doing and how to modify it.

      The situation is much more complex than TFAs suggest - 'psychiatric health' is a pretty vague and shifting target. Depends on your culture, your role in society, your age, your financial situation, your sex, the sex of the idiot sitting next to you, who is president and much more - including your genetic and epigentic makeup. If you are a creative type, you might want to feel a wider breadth of emotions than if you are flying 747's. This doesn't even begin to approach the questions of what goal does 'psychiatric health' have for the society. The powers that be might want everyone on an emotional zombie program. The hoi polloi not so much.

      G-23 Paxilon Hydrochlorate anyone?

      Any mental health professional will tell you that the meds don't work all that well. But they do work. People who really did need to be institutionalized before the advent of antipsychotics are out in the community. It's not entirely clear that this helps them or the community but the drugs are arguably doing something useful.

      Using broad brush numbers like the amount of antidepressant prescriptions and trying to correlate them with other broad brushed studies using vague and varied methodologies and trying to say anything intelligent is a fool's errand.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    15. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by bmo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And how do you propose to fix society so it's not a "shit heap?" Extra points if you can also figure out what we should do with people with mental disorders until you "fix society?" How are you going to make it that nobody is in a bad relationship, loses their job, has a catastrophic medical event that significantly impacts their daily lives, and nobody experiences inconsolable grief over someone close to them dying?

      Oh hay, it's a false dichotomy /and/ a straw-man argument all in one!

      You can improve society so that when things like you posted don't harm people /as much/ as they do today. It's a spectrum, not a binary state.

      Improve availability of education
      Relax or eliminate victimless-crime statutes
      Social safety net - losing a job should not be life or family-threatening.
      Medical safety net - Universal healthcare, like the rest of the developed nations have.
      Decent infrastructure so companies can thrive instead of their trucks being dumped in a river because a bridge collapsed, for example.
      Mandatory vacation time > 1.5 weeks USians
      Enforce labor laws.

      All of these things contribute to societal and mental health. But we can't have that /here/ because that's SOCIALIZUM!#@$!@#$@#$!

      Come back when you get a clue.

      --
      BMO

    16. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by bmo · · Score: 1

      I accidentally a preposition and end of sentence, sue me.

      --
      BMO

    17. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's "I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full frontal lobotomy."

    18. Re: Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Do they add bromides to the drinking water in Denmark? Are they naturally present in significant quantities?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    19. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by jemmyw · · Score: 1

      Denmark also has one of the highest suicide rates in the world.

      I lived in Denmark. It's a nice place, but it's not filled with overly happy people. My belief is that they've used their tax and welfare system to bring up the happiness of the worst off. That's probably a good thing. But in your socioeconomic strata the people there aren't experiencing a greater daily joy. There were some quite negative aspects too, definitely some racism and superiority problems.

      I also had anxiety while I was living in Denmark. I resisted taking the drugs offered and took myself to a phycologist. That was probably a mistake, I don't like the drugs for the unpleasant side effects, but had I taken them straight away I'd have skipped.a whole period of almost debilitating anxiety, and I could have worked to come off the drugs. Instead I got worse and worse until they seemed to be the only option. 18 months later and I've just come off of the SSRIs.

    20. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      took myself to a phycologist. That was probably a mistake

      It definitely was, unless you're an aquatic plant.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    21. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Let's take a look at your solutions. I agree with most of them, but right now there's no way to get from here to there in the USA.

      #1 - improving availability of education - is less effective as time goes by. Just ask all the 30-somethings with several degrees who are working part-time at the minimum wage.

      #2 - Relax or eliminate victimless-crime statutes - already done in some countries, and others are following. However, that won't make the world less of a shit-hole.

      #3 - Social safety net - losing a job should not be life or family-threatening - I totally agree. Suicides are rising for one group - white middle-aged men - because of the crappy job market. Sure, employment is rising, but going from a wel-paying job to stock clerk part-time is going to hit anyone hard unless they already have enough $$$ in the bank that they are just working to have something to do.

      #4 - Medical safety net - it's insane not to have this. It saves money. People can't afford to take care of a problem when it's small, so they later end up in emergency with a more serious condition that could have been prevented. And since it's more serious, it's more likely to interfere with their work, or even get them fired because they can no longer do the job, so society at large ends up paying for it anyway.

      #5 - Sorry, can't stop creating conflicts in other parts of the world to support the military-industrial complex.

      #6 - I once worked 6 years with 0 vacation, even though it's mandatory here. Needed to get the work done. IT sucks. Quitting was such a relief.

      #7 - Enforce labour laws - this is slashdot - the crazies will come out and say that working conditions should just be between employer and employee, not realizing the imbalance in negotiating positions. And they think the same thing about wages and hate the minimum wage because it "kills jobs." If they had their way, they'd put it down as close to zero as possible and kill their workers instead.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    22. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by jemmyw · · Score: 1

      psychologist, thanks

    23. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Oh, and I'd be dead long ago if I didn't live in a place with universal health care and drug coverage.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    24. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And bars don't close at 1am like they do here.

      It must be just me, but complaining about bars not being open after 1am is a sad commentary about your life.

      As in, "I must have alcohol available to me at all hours of the day and night to live my life to the fullest."

    25. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > clinical depression [...] is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain.

      This simply is unfounded. Please don't promote this narrative. It was psychiatry affirming the consequent; drugs that meddled with neurotransmitters seemed to cause an improvement, therefore there must be an imbalance.

      Psychiatric medications promote an imbalance, they don't correct them. SSRI poop-out? That's tardive dysphoria. Brain zaps and flu symptoms on cessation? That's dependency and withdrawal.

    26. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by sjames · · Score: 1

      Actually, the chemical imbalance theory is on shaky ground at best. It's convenient for marketing antidepressants to be taken for life, but that's about all it has going for it. Otherwise, why would side effects hit as soon as you start taking the drug, but the benefits lag by about 6 weeks?

      I'm not saying there are no benefits, just that correcting a simple chemical imbalance doesn't seem likely to be the mechanism.

      As for fixing what is making people unhappy, just because a pill can correct it doesn't mean the origin of the problem is internal. Consider, an NSAID can help with the pain and swelling of a strained back. Does that mean the problem is an inherited imbalance in my back rather than my mistaken belief that I can move that fallen tree by myself?

      Schizophrenia shows all signs of being controlled by genetics though there is some evidence that external conditions can hasten or delay onset. Susceptibility to depression may also be genetic, but there is significant evidence that it can be brought on or sent into remission through external influences only. For example, seasonal affective disorder.

      I wouldn't be at all surprised if the problem is some combination of being always on, multitasking, poor sleep hygiene, and poor financial security. The constant IV drip of fear from the media and our "fearless" leaders isn't helpful either.

    27. Re: Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't it obvious? America nearly had Hillary Clinton as president... of course they should be depressed that she came so close to winning. Let's see how much better Americans feel after Trump finishes his third term and America is great again.

    28. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When life feels like shit, you want to take everyone down with you.

      YMMV. My experience of chronic depression is entirely personal. I have no desire to hurt or harm others, regardless of how I perceive the world.

    29. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by gtall · · Score: 1

      Yup, alcoholism is surely the path of sanity.

    30. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by bmo · · Score: 1

      "but right now there's no way to get from here to there in the USA."

      Re-read this until you figure out what the real problem is.

      --
      BMO

    31. Re: Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      society had no bearing on my depression, only my interpersonal relationships or things in my immediate sphere etc. im not about to get a script because trump won or ferguson / trayvon news. though i can see how ones economic status will effect them, but to reverse that thought i have known some happy paupers.

    32. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by gtall · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have the Harvard Guide to Psychiatry DSM IV (I need to get V). I had to get it for some sort of bearing on peculiar grad students I kept running into. For awhile, I thought I was a strange attractor. Then I came to the conclusion that academia is simply more accommodating to oddness than business world, so it accumulates a wider variety of "clientele".

      Anyhow, it quickly becomes clear that one person with symptoms doesn't have entirely this condition or that condition. Rather, they pick from a smorgasbord of conditions. So each case is different. Add a bit of time for them to water and feed their conditions (and they do), then they get rather full-blown oddness. Some have learned to do bank shots off the reactions they generate in other people. These are difficult cases to handle because they are working you but you still feel sorry for them.

      The best psychiatry can do with drugs is try this or that combination in the hopes of hitting the magic one for the oddball in their office. And then the oddball's physiology is changing over time due to age, diet, or just general physical drift. So what works one year might not work the next. The easiest to deal with are those with an identifiable condition like hyper or hypo thyroid. Few are ever this simple.

    33. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by lgw · · Score: 1

      In the US it varies enormously state-by-state.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    34. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by another_twilight · · Score: 1

      Drugs are used to mitigate a lack of certain neurochemicals in the brain

      The effect of drugs in treating depression is part of the evidence used to support the neurochemical imbalance theory of depression. However, there is some debate as to whether the success of drugs in treating depression is the result, primarily, of the placebo effect.

      Yes, some of this is probably the result of poor matching of patient to drug/dosage and/or over prescription by under qualified GPs.

    35. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

      When life feels like shit, you want to take everyone down with you.

      For you perhaps. I've been through some very dark times myself, but in my case the only thing that stopped me doing something... permanent... was the thought of how it would hurt the people who care about me. What really scared me at the time was that if things carried on as they were then sooner or later the scales would tip the other way.

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    36. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      There is no way to export that much fancy beer without developing a superiority problem. Their sacrifice is appreciated.

    37. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Good news: In Utah they close at 5 a.m.
      Bad News: They don't open.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    38. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by jemmyw · · Score: 1

      There were definitely some positives: beer and bicycles, and the occasional mix of the two.

    39. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BlackPignouf · · Score: 2

      'try this for two weeks and come back to see me'

      100% true. My wife has been diagnosed with postpartum psychosis 5 years ago.
      She spent 2.5 years in a clinic, trying new medication every 3 weeks or so. I've seen dozens of symptom you don't want to see, especially not on a young woman who happens to be the mother of your child.
      Somehow, her 4th psychiatrist managed to find the right combination, very possibly thanks to sheer luck. My wife's now perfectly healthy and we're a happy family.
      I still cannot believe it, even though it's been 3 years now. I had lost any hope after 1 year of different treatments. Almost every doctor told me "Time for plan B". What the **** is a plan B when you're alone with your child at home, and your loved one in the clinic, looking like a zombie?

    40. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by another_twilight · · Score: 1

      clinical depression, which is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain.

      And genetics, epigenetics, different physical structures in the brain, environment, and cognition. And given the brain's plasticity, a lot of those can arise or be reinforced by feedback from other systems.

      It has little to do with external factors

      Hmm. The importance of external factors has certainly shifted from the assumption that everyone has the same brain and that nurture gives rise to variation, but stress is still strongly linked to developing depression, even if those with a genetic predisposition are more likely to develop depression and/or more likely to develop depression, sooner. Chronic depression is linked to people who suffer from PTSD, chronic pain etc.

    41. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Hognoxious · · Score: 0

      In any case, psychologist != psychiatrist, so you're still full of shit.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    42. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real problem is engaging your trolling nonsequitor, proposing the impossible. If I could only change the gravity constant...

    43. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by jemmyw · · Score: 1

      That's a terrible thing to say, I can't understand why you would respond in such a way. It was a terrible ordeal for me. I saw a psychologist privately via my health insurance. My doctor wanted me to see a psychiatrist, and she really tried, but she was unable to get a referral to something suitable in the time I was in the country. I visited a psychiatric ward (by referral) for an assessment, and they explained that I could be admitted but they didn't do outpatient services, so being admitted meant staying in the ward.

      Timing was also at play. Had I been assessed in the agitated state I was in before taking Sertraline (or the first week of taking it which was worse) then maybe things would be different. But by the time I was someone I had calmed down quite a bit. The other problem was that because it was anxiety I was convinced I had a serious illness, and I insisted on getting referred to a neurologist, who I have to say was brilliant and went a long way to assuring me my symptoms were the result of anxiety.

    44. Re: Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF are you talking about? Denmark is at place 82 on the suicidal rates of the world (USA is at 50) en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

    45. Re: Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by jemmyw · · Score: 1

      You're correct, I've fallen for the meme: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/oct/23/viral-image/internet-graphic-says-suicide-rate-much-higher-den/

    46. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Kjella · · Score: 2

      How are you going to make it that nobody is in a bad relationship, loses their job, has a catastrophic medical event that significantly impacts their daily lives, and nobody experiences inconsolable grief over someone close to them dying? (...) And if you tell someone to "just pull yourself out of it", you deserve it when they punch you in the face.

      At the danger of sounding like a cheap self-help book, only you can change how you feel. I'm not saying it's the solution to those with really grave problems, but most everybody else just need perspective. Whenever I'm feeling miserable and want to wallow in self-pity I take a look at BBC News for someone who's really in a shithole and had fate really kick them in the nuts like in Aleppo right now. And then my problems don't quite seem like the worst thing that's ever happened to anybody anymore, in fact I often end up feeling almost like I've cried wolf for no reason.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    47. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Megol · · Score: 1

      Speak for yourself. Depressed people in general doesn't want to take anybody down, not even themselves. There's a reason being suicidal is counted as (partially) separate from the depression itself - and there are mentally ill people that are suicidal and not depressed.

    48. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Megol · · Score: 1

      Now if there would only be a drug that made you less of a know-it-all (your journal and tag line are irritating from someone that should understand things aren't black and white).

    49. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      The real problem is that people always get the government they deserve. You weren't vigilant enough over the last 40 years and look what it got you. It's a self-limiting problem though, because eventually enough people will be angry enough to take action to force change.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    50. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      So your solution to being depressed because you're in a shit-hole is to show people that there are people worse off? That definitely won't work. Depressed people know that others are better off than them, if only because others aren't depressed and fighting suicide.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    51. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1
      And my tagline reflects what a lot of us are saying - you have a problem with it, that's not my problem. Maybe if you were less of a know-ot-all on that topic and instead found out how others feel, you might not be so irritated.

      Some things are pretty black-and-white. This is one of them.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    52. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      improving availability of education - is less effective as time goes by. Just ask all the 30-somethings with several degrees

      You're conflating education with college degree.

      How many of those 30 somethings with several degrees would have been better served with voctech training?

    53. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My wife turns into crazy jealous irritated person for 20 days a month (pre and post PMS). And she is currently off from the very small amount of anti-depressants (or something like that) as we are trying to get a kid, and there is little research on the effect on the child. Based on the medicines (and not having them in various points of life), I am definitely convinced that the chemical imbalance is the cause at least in my wife's case. And I'm also sure that it isn't easy to fix.

      And I am pretty sure that the experiences collected with the imbalance affecting memories and the strength of experiences have resulted in some damage which is not repairable with medicines. Interesting times. For years.

    54. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Megol · · Score: 1

      Actually, the chemical imbalance theory is on shaky ground at best. It's convenient for marketing antidepressants to be taken for life, but that's about all it has going for it. Otherwise, why would side effects hit as soon as you start taking the drug, but the benefits lag by about 6 weeks?

      There are plenty of reasons why that may be. The chemical imbalance is the best theory given the data available (yes people do research on that from time to time).

      I'm not saying there are no benefits, just that correcting a simple chemical imbalance doesn't seem likely to be the mechanism.

      As for fixing what is making people unhappy, just because a pill can correct it doesn't mean the origin of the problem is internal. Consider, an NSAID can help with the pain and swelling of a strained back. Does that mean the problem is an inherited imbalance in my back rather than my mistaken belief that I can move that fallen tree by myself?

      Of course people can be unhappy from external causes, that is just natural. Depression is marked with differences in thought patterns and behavior that makes it much less likely to resolve by itself even if any external causes are resolved. While I realize that the side-effects can be severe for some TCA (tricyclic antidepressants) and ECT (electro-convulsive therapy) helped me when severely depressed. I still try to inform people that ECT is a safe and extremely effective treatment that helps in some cases where antidepressants have no effect.

      Schizophrenia shows all signs of being controlled by genetics though there is some evidence that external conditions can hasten or delay onset. Susceptibility to depression may also be genetic, but there is significant evidence that it can be brought on or sent into remission through external influences only. For example, seasonal affective disorder.

      I wouldn't be at all surprised if the problem is some combination of being always on, multitasking, poor sleep hygiene, and poor financial security. The constant IV drip of fear from the media and our "fearless" leaders isn't helpful either.

      Plenty of people get depressed without external reasons. Postpartum depression can be extremely severe even if the child is wanted and the life situation is perfect. People that "have it all" can suddenly get depressed and kill themselves without anybody (including themselves) knowing why. People that have starting to get depressed can suddenly treat small things like someone not greeting them loudly enough (even it they were greeted with a smile etc.) probably meant that someone was insulted and/or irritated by the depressed person - had to explain once that I didn't despise a depressed fellow in exactly that situation.

      Life is complicated. Make lemonade.

    55. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by bmo · · Score: 1

      No, the real problem is people like you assuming "we can't do it!" and repeating that phrase to all and sundry, which they hear enough of which that they are truly convinced that we can't.

      Like Clinton did when asked about universal health coverage. She literally laughed it off. She said progressives (you know, the people who espouse the values I listed previously) were a bunch of basement dwellers.

      Because status-quo is so fucking great. Funny how I predicted that the DNC would get their comeuppance should they ignore the anger behind both the bernie and trump campaigns. This was during the NH primary - me to a Time reporter.

      >you weren't vigilant enough

      *I* was. But when your so-called liberal party puts in a right winger (republicanism in drag, exemplified by Clinton picking Tim Kaine as her running mate to /really/ tell the progressives she didn't need our votes) against another right winger, people tend to stay home. And so they did, in droves.

      It's also not my fault that we have propaganda channels broadcasting nonsense 24/7. Take it up with the assholes with the money backing them.

      --
      BMO

    56. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      My wife turns into crazy jealous irritated person for 20 days a month (pre and post PMS).

      My wife had the same problem, and it was destroying our marriage. So we went to the doctor, and she was diagnosed with severe calcium deficiency. Calcium and magnesium (you need both to in balance) supplements worked wonders. Her PMS went from two weeks to three days. I can put up with anything for three days.

    57. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been through some very dark times myself, but in my case the only thing that stopped me doing something... permanent... was the thought of how it would hurt the people who care about me.

      Frankly, that's the only reason I'm still here. That, and my life insurance doesn't pay out for suicide.

    58. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Voctech training? Like truck driver (will be redundant in 10-15 years). Computer programmer (only work if it also includes a ticket to Hyalabad). Translator (simultaneous machine translation of speech already works fairly well). Working in the oil patch (very cyclical). Becoming a pilot (doesn't pay nearly what it used to, and on the regional lines it's close to or at minimum wage. How does $22,500 a year sound for a 40-hour week?) Welder (cyclical and the big job that aren't done by robots eventually will be). Construction (cyclical). Hotel management (you'll never get beyond the front desk, a low-pay dead-end job). Mining equipment operator (already mostly automated). Web site design (yeah, right. Like we need more web monkeys. I've worked with some of these people - one of them wasn't even able to use a mouse properly). Hairdressing? Most make less than minimum wage because they have to cover chair rental fees, etc. and the income is sporadic.

      Lower-end jobs will be automated out of existence because they don't need much in the way of skill. Others will be automated out of existence because machines can do them better. Welding is a great example of that. So no, vocational training isn't the answer. The world can only absorb so many jobs of any one trade, and with automation, that number is going one way - down.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    59. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1
      You as a nation weren't vigilant enough. That's why you keep getting the government you deserve. Your one vote or opinion makes no difference. Until a significant number of people want change and are willing to stick their necks out to get it, you're stuck with that.

      Also, you weren't vigilant enough. I don't see you trying to change things by running for office. You know, sticking your neck out.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    60. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      If you think most of those are Voctech it just goes to show how out of touch you are.

      But continue on what ever rant you were on.

    61. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by bmo · · Score: 1

      It's too bad that Slashdot limits relationship changes, because you're an asshole.

      No, really, you are. Putting my money where my mouth is? I did that multiple times this election season.

      Fuck you.

      --
      BMO

    62. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      And my tagline reflects what a lot of us are saying - you have a problem with it, that's not my problem. Maybe if you were less of a know-ot-all on that topic and instead found out how others feel, you might not be so irritated.
      Some things are pretty black-and-white. This is one of them.

      No, GP is correct. You practically never acknowledge that you got something wrong, and when somebody calls you out on it, you just carry out the conversation as if you never said it. I myself have caught you at this numerous times.

    63. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by bmo · · Score: 1

      Ever go to a bar and not drink, but be there because your friends or family are? It happens all the time (I do this) and if you think you can't go to a bar and not drink, it's you who has the problem.

      Good night, sir.

      --
      BMO

    64. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      30m pigs? The recent muslim migrants will fix that.

    65. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by eegeerg · · Score: 1

      A little late, but ... epic post sir.

    66. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      They are here. What's your problem?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    67. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 0

      Really? I didn't hear you running for office, ever. Supporting one of the 4 shitty candidates from one of the 4 shitty parties doesn't count.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    68. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Projecting yet again, I see.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    69. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      So let's get down to brass tacks - what you quoted me on? TransParent starred a man in a dress. Jeffrey Tambour, to be more specific. And there were scenes where it was painfully obvious. It was also not realistic. It was stereotypical of how the gay community sees transsexuals.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    70. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      improving availability of education - is less effective as time goes by. Just ask all the 30-somethings with several degrees

      You're conflating education with college degree.

      How many of those 30 somethings with several degrees would have been better served with voctech training?

      All a product of years of trying to promote a college degree in anything as superior to a technical degree. Hell. I took both technical and academic in High school in the early 70's, and got called into the principle's office after the guicance counselor told him what I did. Even though I took a much harder curriculum than 99 percent of the students at our school, they were pissed becaue I was going to make myself look stupid.

      That kind of bitched up attitude is what got us the idea tht an Art HIstory or Gender Studies major is somehow better than a machinist. They better check what a master machinist makes. Takes a while to get there, but so does a Master's degree which a Master machinist equates to,

      While Art History and Gender Studies majors end up either as Baristas at Starbucks, or the two people in the circle of why bother, teaching new generations of Barista's at Starbucks, trying to pay off that 80 thou student debt.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    71. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Voctech training?

      Yes Barbara, and you say it just like the guidance counselers who spit it out like I was saying I wanted to screw babies. It comes out like "Retard training" or Loser training" or school for the stupid children.

      Even my better half, who forgetting that my Vocational training then college work helped bring us a much better standard of living than 90 percent of her friends. Most of my knowledge came rfom the Tekker training. That was not going to be a choice for our son, made clear when she called the "tekkers" losers in front of me.

      Whatever, we are formed and molded, and she like you has a rather low opinion of the lesser folk who went to Votech. She just forgets where I came from and what it did for me.

      Not ever likely to change your mind. Having taken both - I can say with pretty good authority that you are wrong, you just share a popular opinion. I worked in a University environment for over 30 years. I'm smarter than most of them. And I'm a Tekker.

      Your comments about how jobs are going to disappear is interesting, but that is a universal issue, not one linked to us lower class people. I had many different job functions over the years, and a few co workers were let go because they wouldn't adapt. Lifelong learning is the way ahead these days, and even older days.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    72. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by sjames · · Score: 1

      The chemical imbalance is the best theory given the data available

      Actually, neurogenesis looks like a better fit.

      Plenty of people get depressed without external reasons.

      It can happen without apparent external reasons, but it could also be something you overlook or wouldn't know about.

      For example, I have a tendency to get depressed during the shorter days near the solstice unless I make sure to get out in the sun when possible AND make sure I get plenty of sleep (including an afternoon nap most days). As long as I do those things along with my usual meditations, I'm OK.

      Of course, not everyone has the sort of job where they can just take a nap in the afternoon and getting enough sleep can be a challenge for many.

      Naturally, everyone is a bit different, but everyone has stressors that can start a downward spiral (some more easily than others). Our society and culture today offer a lot less time and a lot less slack to decompress than in the past. That means more people off balance with no chance to recover. Beyond that, people aren't taught the importance of decompressing properly.

    73. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      And my tagline reflects what a lot of us are saying - you have a problem with it, that's not my problem. Maybe if you were less of a know-ot-all on that topic and instead found out how others feel, you might not be so irritated.

      Some things are pretty black-and-white. This is one of them.

      However, you might admit that you have a few prejudices of your own, such as your dimissal of people such as myself who went to the lower class Vocational Technical schools. While I did take academic courses and went to college as well, I was alaways surprised at the level of disdain for us Tekkers, and how any worthless college degree holder was somehow superior.

      Just sayin' - I'm sympathetic to your space in life, but have no illusions that anyone would be for mine - sympathy isn't needed to tell the truth, just that people should drop their stereotypes.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    74. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by currently_awake · · Score: 2

      If you want a job, go into the trades. Carpenter/framer, plumber, electrician, welder. You can't offshore a job that must be done here, and you can't automate a job where the work environment changes dramatically day by day.

    75. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      If you are a creative type, you might want to feel a wider breadth of emotions than if you are flying 747's. This doesn't even begin to approach the questions of what goal does 'psychiatric health' have for the society. The powers that be might want everyone on an emotional zombie program. The hoi polloi not so much.

      By the way - this is both insightful and informative. The person might be controlled by drugs, but they might lose their edge.

      There are many creative people who have slight quirks that aren't full blown mental issues, but are interwined with their creativity. Take the OCD disorder Tourette's syndrome. In a study I was reading once, a professional musician at a very high competency level, who also suffered from Tourette's, took drugs that controlled the Tourette's, but he lost his creative edge. Finally, he went off the regimen, and used temporary suppression, and had as many of his outbreaks as possible at home. Musta been interesting when he got home from work.

      The same happens with anti-psychotics, only worse, because the person feels like they are dead.

      Anti depressants aren't anywhere near that bad, but if you take say bipolar, they level the highs as well as the lows. So the patient loses the fun part of the condition along with the bad.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    76. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Yup, alcoholism is surely the path of sanity.

      Alcohol use can actually treat schizophrenia. It can end up adding another problem but it can work in a pinch.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    77. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Ever go to a bar and not drink, but be there because your friends or family are? It happens all the time (I do this) and if you think you can't go to a bar and not drink, it's you who has the problem.

      I hardly drink, but I've found that when I walk into a room where a group of people have been drinking, they are all annoying assholes, and don't settle down and fly right until I have a drink of my own.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    78. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by ChrisMaple · · Score: 0

      The medical and social "safety nets" costs immense amounts of money - so much that businesses that might otherwise be profitable fold. All the employees lose their jobs, and of those some become depressed.

      The economic damage caused by "safety nets" and the command-and-control government needed to impose them cause much of the depression they claim to alleviate.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    79. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by EllisDees · · Score: 1

      The problem is that most of these drugs haven't been shown to work better than placebo people on anything but the worst forms of depression.

      --
      -- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
    80. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by EllisDees · · Score: 1

      Society isn't a shit heap. By almost any measure, things are better than they have ever been for almost everybody in the world. Wars are at an all time low, violence is too. Things only seem worse because the media and politicians stand to gain from you thinking that way.

      --
      -- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
    81. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Actually, the chemical imbalance theory is on shaky ground at best. It's convenient for marketing antidepressants to be taken for life, but that's about all it has going for it. Otherwise, why would side effects hit as soon as you start taking the drug, but the benefits lag by about 6 weeks?

      The benefits may lag. They don't necessarily do. I am kind of lucky, every serious antidepressant I've tried (sertraline, mirtazapine, bupropion) started working from the very first day.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    82. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 1

      And you are an asshole. Go crawl back under your rock.

      --
      There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
    83. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      suck a dick, pig!

    84. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      This shows again a COMPLETE lack of understanding mental health.

      Not a clever thing to say when your "understanding" is limited to a myth invented to sell drugs:

      Drugs are used to mitigate a lack of certain neurochemicals in the brain, a PHYSICAL condition.

      A myth for which there is literally zero evidence.

      http://www.thestar.com/news/in...

    85. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      The people being treated with antidepressants are mostly suffering from clinical depression, which is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain.

      That's just a myth invented by drug companies to sell more drugs.

      http://www.thestar.com/news/in...

      Long ago it was believed that schizophrenia was caused by "bad parenting" (cold domineering mothers and psychologically detached fathers). That has been utterly debunked.

      Actually, you're wrong here too. It simply became unpopular.

      The cause is mostly determined by genetics and prenatal nutrition.

      Strike 3. Cause remains unknown.

      We know it's not genetics because kids put up for adoption by schizophrenic parents are no more likely to have schizophrenia than the average person.

    86. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This shows again a COMPLETE lack of understanding mental health.

      Agreed. You are also misinformed about what depression is. I take it you got all your depression information from ads or from companies who make the medications? Look at an industry you know well and then tell me how true their ads are. All industries are the same in that regard. While part of your post is correct, parts are also incorrect.

      Anti-depressants attempt to treat the symptoms, not the underlying cause of depression. They're supposed to be used as a stop-gap to give you enough energy to fix whatever is causing your depression. If you're planning on being on them for life you're doing it wrong. We didn't create anti-depressants we discovered them then came up with a theory of how depression works by what those meds do. They took people who were helped by the drugs and dissected their brains and discovered massive imbalances in serotonin. Note the lack of controls, the initial studies only dissected people who had depression and who had taken the meds. They never dissected depressed people who didn't take the meds so they never created a model of what a normally depressed brain looks like.

      It's true that these meds change neurotransmitter levels, but they don't fix them, they screw them up. Later dissection research shows the brain tries to fight off the med's effects. The brain changes how it regulates transmitters in order to undo what the meds are doing. That's why people abusing anti-depresstants (almost everyone who takes them) needs to keep upping and changing the doses. Their brains are adapting, trying to get back to normal. Now something in your life may have adjusted what your brain thinks is normal, but anti-depressants don't change that. You need to get your brain to reset its definition of normal. The meds don't do that, they throw it off balance even more.

      Have you ever received a depression diagnosis? I have. I had clinical depression (which is worse than normal depression as it sort of turns into a personality trait) for 15 years and had two suicide attempts. There are no physical diagnostic tests. No one drills into your brain to see what your neurotransmitter levels are (currently the only way to check them). It's 100% guesswork which is one reason doctors keep moving patients through different meds. They're just looking for something to have a positive effect, ignoring the underlying causes.

      And notice how the ads have changed. A few years ago it was depressed people have critically low levels of serotonin. SSRIs increase those levels thus depression is solely caused by low serotonin. However when non-depressed people are given SSRIs (meaning they should have normal levels of serotonin) they develop depressions (even when not told what the pills are, so no placebo effect here). This was known before SSRIs went on the market. So if anti-depressants are improperly prescribed you actually develop real depression and use that as an excuse to stay on them. Anti-depressant's side effects and withdraw effects are depression, so it's extremely hard to get off them as you never know if you've fixed your initial depression's underlying cause or not because you'll feel depressed no matter what when you stop them. Once people were able to get that research out in the open the companies changed their tune, now it's improper balance of neurotransmitters. That's not the cause though it may be a symptom, but treating symptoms doesn't fix the cause and these meds have serious side-effects, too serious to be risked just for treating symptoms. This is all still ignoring that most anti-depressants don't perform better than placebos, well they do if know how to lie with statistics. Since one of their side effects is depression, I'd argue anti-depressants are actually worse than placebos.

      With a little training, depression is something completely within your power to change though mental outlook alone. Do most people actually do that? No. They buy p

    87. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plan B is last hope treatments like hypnosis, stress management, getting a pet, outdoor workouts, or randomly making large changes in your life until you're no longer depressed. Considering studies have shown these treatments to be equally or more effective than plan A, one needs to wonder why doctors don't simply start with plan B. Since your family is suffering (I take it she is still on meds?), you owe it to yourself and your family to look at the research yourself.

    88. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At work we had the yearly Christmas party at a pub this year. I went, even though I don't drink (besides, I was driving, so no drinking either way).

      It was so boring that I'm now considering not going to any more Christmas parties as long as I work at this company.

      I know the problem isn't me, because I didn't have this problem at my previous job.

    89. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Two people can be in identical circumstances

      Actually no, they can't. Everyone has a personal history. You want to claim that mental health is an issue of nature more than nurture, but you are going to have a hard time demonstrating this to be true.

      Really? So since I know someone whose parents died, I guess mine are immortal now???

    90. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > The people being treated with antidepressants are mostly suffering from clinical depression, which is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain.

      Horseshit sold to the public by big pharma.

    91. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My daughter (10 at the time) was the victim of a horrific kidnapping. Her kidnapper was sentenced this last year (live w/o parole + 200 + years to life). Now 14, she suffers debilitating PTSD and anxiety. She hasn't been to school in 2 months and can become catatonic or can relive her trauma (it's traumatic just hearing her screams) from just a small amount of stress or anxiety.

      We're in the same boat you are with regards to finding the right medications. She hasn't been put in a clinic, though it's been discussed. Her last med gave her a reaction like she was on LSD (light trails, seeing dragons and snakes and thinking she had 7 fingers on her hands).

      Raising a child is hard. I'm lucky I have my partner -- my wife. If either one of us were out of the equation I fear for where my daughter would be. I'm so glad you got your partner back and your story gives me a little extra hope for my daughter.

    92. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      G-23 Paxilon Hydrochlorate anyone?

      I find that to be a compelling, and harrowing, comparision.

      Most of my friends and family that have been put on anti-depressants generally seem to get calmer, their affects blunt, and they become a little more emotionally apathetic.

      A doctor tried putting me on them once (not for depression, but for a neurological condition). They caused me to go into a multi-day rage fit that was only kept to a dull roar with all of my willpower and a big bottle of tranquillizers. It's a strange experience being consumed by seemingly unending anger and hate against your will.

    93. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      and you can't automate a job where the work environment changes dramatically day by day.

      Yet.

    94. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by kria · · Score: 1

      Perhaps one of the issues now is that very nearly all depression seems to be treated as something that anti-depressants can take care of. I'm not sure what the ratio of people with "I have a chemical imbalance" depression is versus "my life sucks because, say, I lost my job or my spouse" depression, but talk therapy sounds like it's become a rare, rare creature.

      Unfortunately, you also get regular doctors prescribing those anti-depressants, rather than mental health experts. Shortly before my divorce, I was definitely depressed, and my GP prescribed anti-depressants... which became completely unnecessary once he was out of my life. I mean, yes, I had moments of sadness, but with discussion with friends I pulled out of it.

      Note: that is not a commentary that all depression just needs talking or sunshine and fresh air and that kind of thing. I fully believe some people have issues that are not due to their situation but to their brain chemistry. I just think we have become very bad at telling which is which. I would think supplementing the use of anti-depressants with talk therapy would be another good way to go, but we don't seem to be mainly doing this.

    95. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some psychologists in the united states can prescribe. Depends on country and state laws. So yeah, it coulda been a psychologist in Denmark, I don't know their laws.

    96. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      I have a low opinion of voctech training, not the people taking it, who are mostly being screwed over by "institutes" that get them to take out big loans for little value in return. I've seen the results of people getting scammed. It's not pretty, and it's why the fed finally started to crack down on the worst of them, but they still game the system and suck in people every day, giving them a mostly-useless "diploma" that has no official recognition in return for debts they can never get out from under.

      Also, I never said that only lower-class jobs will be affected. What I've said is that currently we're seeing college and university degrees becoming less a guarantee of a job, even as the debts to get those papers rise much higher than inflation. I wrote a paper about this very problem back in the '70s that challenged the common view of the value of education, especially in what were then high-inflation times. Better to use those years to work than to take on debt for an education, because at the end of 5 years you'll be better off. Take the same energy, time, and debt to start a business instead. Inflation is your friend then, because you're earning increasing amounts every year, but paying back debt in decreasing-value dollars.

      The current low-inflation scenario does the exact opposite - it doesn't allow for capital accumulation unless you're already one of the 1%.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    97. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by vel-ex-tech · · Score: 1

      Ok, non-insane post for me.

      Let's take a look at who's responsible for TransParent. Created by: Jill Soloway who seems like she should fucking know better. Executive producers: Jill Soloway and Andrea Sperling.

      Now, while I'm still digesting the reality that there is such a thing as a gay lifestyle, it's pretty clear that what's presented are the views of womyn-born-womyn.

      I don't know about you personally, but having an advanced infiltrator class woman suit myself, it really does scare the shit out of people, both womyn-born-womyn and their white knights. They absolutely do not want to acknowledge that they're unable to ID somebody like me as an assigned male on sight.

      You've tried to convince me that TERFs are just fringe wingnuts. But how the hell else does somebody like the man-in-a-dress star of TransParent win "the Golden Globe Award for Best Actor in a Television Series -- Musical or Comedy and the Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Lead Actor in a Comedy Series" (Wikipedia)? I mean, that's a fucking insult. They're scared as shit. They're trying to console themselves that they're up against T-600s and they want to convince everybody out there that T-900 advanced infiltrators don't exist. Harisoo--doesn't exist! Nope! Estrogen HRT! No effects lol! Just all men in dresses wanting to invade the women's room! (Cue that New Braunfels, TX autotuned music video) Hide your kids, hide your wife, hide your kids, hide your wife!

      I mean, fuck 'em. It's their heart attack when they find out that they've been hitting on an advanced infiltrator or almost invited an advanced infiltrator somewhere for womyn-born-womyn only.

    98. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Again, you foolishly ascribe to me something that is not true, because you make assumptions. After I finished my education, I went into something completely unrelated - bought an F-150 4x4 and a Case 580 backhoe and taught myself how to be an excavation contractor. Far more fun than a stuffy office job, and truth be told, I would much rather operate a hydraulic shovel or a grader or a bulldozer than have to put up with all the bs associated with tech.

      Can't go back to it because I can't drive anything due to damage caused by retinal disease. So don't assume that I look down on "lower-class" jobs. You assume wrong.

      As for tech, it's shit. The work environment is limited, especially compared to working in the great outdoors and getting a decent amount of exercise (less risk of DVT than sitting for hours on end in front of a keyboard and less stress because generally the bosses know what they know and what they don't, and it's much easier to get work performance metrics so you don't have to justify "today was one of my most productive days - I deleted 1,000 lines of code."

      IT was a serious mistake. Driving a bus would have been better (better pension and health plans, and union protection, for example). Having been a member of the Steelworkers, I really don't understand why IT workers think that unions are somehow beneath them, saying such things as "they are not needed." They'll change their tune when their job gets "right-sized" or contracted out to Hyalabad.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    99. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      I agree 100%. Unfortunately, welding is being automated, and so are experiments to automate interior partition framing on large office projects. But you'll never be able to automate using one piece of heavy equipment to unstick another. Each case is too different, and it's too freaking dangerous to leave it to a machine that can easily scrap some very expensive machinery because it's impossible to program in instinct.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    100. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mine DOES pay out for suicide but I'm only still here because it would seriously screw up my kids' lives if I killed myself. My wife would get over it just fine, but the kids would be messed up for a while.

    101. Re: Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the kids would be messed up for a while.

      the kids would be messed up for the rest of their lives.

      FTFY

    102. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      Projecting yet again, I see.

      Riiiight. Well, since you bring up trans issues all the time, how about that time I corrected you on the fact that FTM trans people get male pattern baldness, then you denied it, then I showed you proof, and then you just pretended like I never said it in every post afterwards, even when I brought it up again? Or how about when I corrected you with your false statement that trans people have a brain of the opposite gender?

      As for your below comments, I was referring to the GPs know-it-all comment, not the de-emphasized portion. By English convention, parenthesis means you're de-emphasizing a specific portion of text (as opposed to double-hyphen, which is to emphasize it.)

    103. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Few are ever this simple.

      That might have something to do with the fact that all of popular modern psychiatry is built on the wild, incredible successes of a proven placebo, Prozac. (To be fair. it has non-placebo effects for anxiety. Unlike people suffering from depression, one out of five people suffering from panic attacks find it effective!)

      There's every reason to suspect the efficacy of other SSRIs have been similarly overstated.

      Rather, they pick from a smorgasbord of conditions.

      Because the conditions are biased conjecture with a thin veneer of statistics smeared over it. Psychiatry isn't science. It's proto-science. The DSM V, as with the DSM IV before it, contains phrases like "except for religion." Any endeavor that makes explicit allowances for the lies and delusions of religion is by definition unscientific.

    104. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      A universal health care system can be cheaper than what the US has now (the most expensive one is a little over two-thirds what we pay overall), and doesn't have to be paid for by employers. Not having to pay medical coverage for employees would generally give businesses a boost.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    105. Re: Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a suspicion that depression in the U.S. will skyrocket over the next 4 years — and not coincidentally, no healthcare to deal with it.

    106. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by golden_hands · · Score: 1

      Nice post- good analysis. I wish I had some mod points to up mod your post.

    107. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      Depression != psychosis.
      She still takes on meds and probably will be for a long time, but there's no noticeable side effect.
      We changed our lifestyle, and try to minimize stress sources as much as possible.

    108. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      You're a huge asshole. Try empathy for a while.

    109. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      I wish you and your family luck, strength, and hope!
      Once it gets better, you really have a different point of view and find it easier to concentrate on the important stuff in life.
      I wish it'll soon happen to you!

      PS: Meds are important at first, but pets/music/sport/travels/whatever could help relieve the pain/anger/fear in the long term.

    110. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      Also, Plan B for doctors was "Get out of her life, leave her to rot and try to build a happy family without the mother!"

    111. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Drugs are used to mitigate a lack of certain neurochemicals in the brain, a PHYSICAL condition

      Except there's no good PHYSICAL evidence that modern antidepressants "mitigate" this in the sense of bring patient's neurotransmitter mixture closer to a 'normal', non-depressant brain. On top of this, SSRIs and SNRIs have very bad efficacy, with the granddaddy of them all (Prozac) having efficacy vs. depression so low that they can't be sure it's any better than a placebo.

      The main issue is when MD's without psychiatric training started prescribing these drugs. "Try this and come back in two weeks" can work with a rash, but not with mental health.

      No, that's exactly what needs to be done. Patients need to be told that all medicines that currently have on-label approval as antidepressants in all liklihood will not sufficiently help them, and the ones that stand a halfway decent chance of even partially helping them have a strong liklihood of severe side effects. They need to be clearly informed that this is a crapshoot and that their best chance at finding effective management is to keep moving on after each failure.

      Finding the right drugs titrated at the right dosages requires direct interaction between patient and doctor, and probably therapy to understand the social and mental effects of the underlying physical issues.

      Psychiatry isn't a science. It's proto-science. The only thing they can do that has the slightest bit of scientific backing is to issue their patients some questionnaires (the same exact ones used in studies) and prescribe based on that. And that's something GPs can do just as well as psychiatrists.

    112. Re:Or people are just under/wrongly medicated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, depression was too heavily on my mind to read what you wrote rather than what I expected you to write.

  5. You can medically hurt someone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And never see a prison wall. hurt someone any other way.

    1. Re:You can medically hurt someone by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Every person's brain is different. Some people react well to one medicine but not another. Others need a combination, and lots of work to get the dose right - and there's no guarantee that the illness won't deteriorate with time.

      The side effects for any individual can't be predicted in advance, same as any other medicine.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  6. No, no no! Your doc needs his swimming pool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Think of two solutions to mental illness:

    1. One that works - quick, fast, cheap, done.

    2. One that requires multiple visits to a doctor, every two weeks for 10 years. Oh, and lots of expensive drugs.

    Guess which one is incentivizes doctors and drug companies to pursue it?

  7. Do caffeine and excess sugar count? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know they are psyco-active.

    I'm just asking if they hurt more people than they help.

    1. Re:Do caffeine and excess sugar count? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know they are psyco-active.

      I'm just asking if they hurt more people than they help.

      Short answer.. barring underlying medical conditions contraindicating either..

      Over consumption of sugar leads to insulin resistance and weight gain and in some cases type 2 diabetes in susceptible individuals. It definitely leads to weight gain.

      Caffeine not so much, though some people are more negatively affected by it than others. If I had to say which one was worse.. Sugar definitely! You can certainly live without both in your diet and do quite well.. Neither is an essential nutrient. I know every time I point this out someone pops up and says sugar is needed for the body to function... but it is not an essential nutrient as your body has the ability to make glucose on demand from protein and fats. Over consuming sugar causes a host of negative problems though, and some of them are neurological in nature. Overconsumption of carbohydrates shuts down the body's ability to use fats for energy which there is mounting evidence, can contribute to excessive fat gain, fatty liver (as in non-alcoholic fatty liver) and arteriosclerosis. More and more high fat diets are being proven to not contribute to heart disease and the evidence points to overconsumption of empty carbohydrate calories being a more likely cause of heart disease. as for causing psychological problems, both substances have an addictive potential.

  8. What else should we expect . . . ? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

    “From a pathological standpoint, the incipient twenty-first century is determined neither by bacteria nor by viruses, but by neurons. Neurological illnesses such as depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), borderline personality disorder (BPD), and burnout syndrome mark the landscape of pathology at the beginning of the twenty-first century. They are not infections, but infarctions; they do not follow from the negativity of what is immunologically foreign, but from an excess of positivity. Therefore, they elude all technologies and techniques that seek to combat what is alien.” Byung-Chul Han, The Burnout Society

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:What else should we expect . . . ? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Oh stop. That's almost a word salad obfuscating as insight.

      Mental issues - depression, anxiety, what we know call PTSD, psychosis, personality disorders have been carefully characterized as long as humans have been scratching things down in writing. Much of our history really is a testament to how screwed up humans really are.

      Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it.
          - George Santayana

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:What else should we expect . . . ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously. An excess of positivity? What the fuck does that even mean? People feel like shit because we have better standards of living? That guy is full of shit.

    3. Re:What else should we expect . . . ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like "Smile or Die", I imagine. If everything is possible if you only set your mind to it (positive thinking), then if you're not accomplishing what you want, then surely you aren't pushing your mind enough.

    4. Re:What else should we expect . . . ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And its looking like more and more of those things can be prevented (or lessened if you already have them) through better nutrition.

  9. What will it take by John+Allsup · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The truth the medical fraternity face is that many have had their lives ruined by the drugs they religiously believe in. The 'evidence' rests on a mire of untested and flawed assumptions (in particular the premises of the statistical methods used to relate data to conclusions: many of which cannot be justified unless the possibility of and influence of complex brain behaviour can be safely ignored). The clinical psychology fraternity, and a number of 'maverick' psychiatrists are, more and more, putting across why mainstream 'medical psychiatry' has much wrong. But this is all too easily swamped by billion dollar marketing machines, lobbying and selective sponsored trials which have a habit, like 'proven by science' infomercials, of showing the sponsoring company's products as better than others.

    --
    John_Chalisque
    1. Re:What will it take by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

      Other than marketing and lobbying, you described how science works. Results gradually get accepted, and are hard to replace. Marketing and lobbying are part of Capitalism, take it or leave it. And poorly selected study groups are common to both incompetence and greed. No surprises there.

      Prozac set back depression studies by 20 years, because it seemed to be a solved problem. Mavericky researchers had an uphill battle to prove it wasn't.

      Currently, deep brain stimulation is laughed at, while researchers can take a simple brain scan and identify who will and will not benefit from it instead of pills or cognitive therapy.

      It has to be published, accepted, and then taught to the next generation of doctors, because doctors are people, and people are stubborn and stupid in order to be a mainstream treatment.

      The only quick way to get a treatment accepted is for insurance companies to say they will cover the new one but not pills. Or at least they demand lab analysis or brain scan to determine the potential effectiveness first, forcing doctors to learn. Because good patient outcomes are cost effective for insurance.

  10. It's a trap! by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 2

    This story only made it to Slashdot's front page in order to out the members of Scientology on the board! They're coming to get you!

    Ok maybe not.

    For the first time in ages, the related links beneath the summary are actually... related.

    The ones at the bottom of the comments still aren't though...

  11. Re:No, no no! Your doc needs his swimming pool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. One that works - quick, fast, cheap, done.

    Eating a bullet?

  12. Unsurprising. by ArylAkamov · · Score: 1

    I don't know a single person who has taken these drugs and come out better in the end. Usually they feel better short term, then go off the deep end along with their personality completely changing.

    1. Re:Unsurprising. by youngone · · Score: 1
      I know a single person who is much better off taking drugs

      She has bi-polar II, which can ruin people's lives if not treated. While some of the drugs have awful side effects, the alternative is much, much worse.

    2. Re: Unsurprising. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting anecdote, but not really helpful. I know many people who benefited in the long run. Most who didn't benefit had some other process that medication cannot always help. So we have to be careful on the truth. It is probably somewhere in between. Asthma medications don't always work long term . . . In the particular population that smokes a ton. We have to keep in mind other variables when it comes to mental health too.

    3. Re:Unsurprising. by gtall · · Score: 1

      I do know of one, my sister. There, ironclad anecdotal evidence.

    4. Re:Unsurprising. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anecdotal, I know;

      I know a couple of people that have gone through extensive (and often complex and changing) work with psychiatrists to find the combination of drug and dosage that meant the difference between functional and not. This has changed over time (once established) but will probably be a lifetime regimen.

      Another two have used medication for a several years and then were able to taper and finally dispense with it.

      About twice that many (8-10) have used medication for shorter periods and/or episodically to deal with acute periods (mostly depression and/or anxiety). ... and about the same as all of the above for whom medication was not effective (myself amongst them).

      I can't say that I know of anyone who had a personality change or who 'went off the deep end' as a result of medication. Perhaps it has to do with the nature of the mental illnesses that predominate amongst those we know. Like calls to like, as it were, and I know more people with depression/anxiety disorders with a lower proportion of bipolar and the like.

    5. Re:Unsurprising. by ArylAkamov · · Score: 1

      Good for her. I didn't say my anecdotal evidence was ironclad.

    6. Re:Unsurprising. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do know of one, my sister. There, ironclad anecdotal evidence.

      Your sister wears armor?

  13. Or is life more stressful? by archer,+the · · Score: 1

    Is there any study showing that life today is more -- or less -- stressful than life decades ago? These days, it seems like both parents need to work in order to have enough money to raise kids. Further, the kids need to do more extracurricular activity to get into a good college, which means the parents spend more time driving around.

    To be clear, that is just my observation. I have not done an objective study to measure stress. I just don't think we should blame the medical industry until we've ruled out the other possible cause(s) for more people with mental health issues.

  14. The evidence cited seems pretty thin. by hey! · · Score: 4, Interesting

    (1) Suicide rates -- In the US I think the increase in suicide rate is likely attributable to increased firearm ownership. There is no evidence that I know of that indicates that the increased level of gun ownership presents an increased risk to others -- in fact the rate of firearm homicide has gone down (along with most other violent crimes). But suicidal impulses -- which are very common -- plus a handgun in your pocket... that is a very dangerous combination.

    (2) Rate of DoD PTSD rising -- likely to have to do with the influx of veterans from three wars (Gulf 1 & 2 + Afghanistan), plus a higher survival rate from severe physical trauma.

    (3) Rise of opiate abuse -- coincides with the appearance of new prescription drugs and more aggressive prescribing of pain medication.

    (4) Rise in disability awards -- conflated with a drive to recognize mental disabilities as on a par with physical ones.

    At my age I've lived through many a moral panic, and this feels like the beginnings of one. Which is not to say mental illness doesn't cause real suffering, or that we shouldn't make it more of a priority. But what we need are more evidence-based approaches. Unfortunately we seem to be headed in the opposite direction.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:The evidence cited seems pretty thin. by Solandri · · Score: 5, Informative

      (1) Suicide rates -- In the US I think the increase in suicide rate is likely attributable to increased firearm ownership.

      Suicide rates are up in many OECD countries over the last 10 years, many of whom have strict restrictions on firearm ownership. Several countries which ban or restrict guns have higher suicide rates than the U.S.. Also, it's predominantly males in the U.S. who opt for suicide by gun; females usually try to overdose or slit their wrists. Yet the ratio of male to female suicide rate is practically the same for the U.S. (3.73), UK (3.77), Germany (3.54), France (3.22), Spain (3.73), and Italy (4.0). Suggesting that guns are merely a tool of choice among male U.S. suicides, not an enabler of higher suicide success rates.

      The U.S. is more diligent about collecting this sort of data and making it available to the public. So global trends tend to show up sooner in U.S. data sets. Not because the U.S. is special or atypical. Most of the OECD suicide stats I was able to find still date from 2011. It took quite a bit of searching to find that chart of suicide rates in non-U.S. countries up to 2013.

    2. Re:The evidence cited seems pretty thin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guns are a really bad way to kill yourself. You've seen too many movies. Guns make a huge mess, that somebody's going to have to clean up. Your loved ones, or even innocent bystanders, get blamed for your "murder" far too easily/frequently. It's a little to easy to miss and just fuck yourself up. You may survive as a vegetable, or worse "Locked In", for decades.

      On the other hand, some years back I lived out in the sticks. Very rural. One day two fellows had an argument, and one had an accident. Accidentally fell on a knife eighty some times. (That's 80 not 8.) And he got run over by a car a few times to boot. The survivor put the body in his car and drove off. Unfortunately he took the curve near my house a little too fast. Went off the road. Tried to drive through a tree. Tree won. He took off on foot. Now we've got an armed homicidal maniac on the loose, who's already demonstrable killed at least once. There's only a couple of homes where he can find transportation/shelter/whatever. Nearest police station is half an hour away. Scary times. Weeks later we learned he had gotten out of the area by hitchhiking.

      A lot of folks want to blame firearm ownership on anything under the sun. You should read: Warren vs District of Columbia. You need to learn that you are responsible for protecting yourself! Depend on someone else at your own peril.

      As for #3: Look around. We all saw any doctor who prescribed oxycodone get railroaded. They lost their medical license, their career, often went to jail. All their patients who relied on prescriptions for pain management couldn't get them anymore. It's no surprise they turned to illegal opiates. This crises was manufactured!

      ps. One of the easiest ways to kill yourself is hypoxia. Nitrogen, Helium, pretty much any non-reactive gas other than Oxygen or Carbon-Dioxide will suffice. Put a bag over your head. It's quick, painless, and very effective. Happens by accident often enough. They say it's like going to sleep. Just make sure there's no CO2 buildup or you'll start gasping. And be aware you're going to piss & shit yourself, so pick your location accordingly.

    3. Re:The evidence cited seems pretty thin. by hey! · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter how bad guns are for the purpose. It matters how attractive they are.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    4. Re:The evidence cited seems pretty thin. by jeff4747 · · Score: 2

      In the US I think the increase in suicide rate is likely attributable to increased firearm ownership

      The number of households with at least one gun is down. The number of guns in the average gun-owning-household is way up.

      So in terms of causing suicide, access to firearms is down because there are fewer households with a gun. However, the suicidal person with access to a firearm has more to choose from.

    5. Re:The evidence cited seems pretty thin. by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Suicide rate is twice the US in Japan and firearms are highly restricted there.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
  15. "This story brought to you by our sponsor..." by DrXym · · Score: 1

    "The Church of Scientology - brains washed 24/7. Don't forget to ask for your rundown purification coupon book - of $50 value!"

  16. Re:No, no no! Your doc needs his swimming pool! by diesalesmandie · · Score: 2

    Think of two solutions to mental illness:

    1. One that works - quick, fast, cheap, done.

    2. One that requires multiple visits to a doctor, every two weeks for 10 years. Oh, and lots of expensive drugs.

    Guess which one is incentivizes doctors and drug companies to pursue it?

    You are oversimplifying mental illness; the human brain isn't a piece of machinery where you can just replace a non functioning component with one that does and everything goes back to normal. The problem is people are being prescribed drugs that they don't need where a few sessions of therapy or a change in life circumstance would suffice. However the line between needing medication and not needing it is very blurred, and it differs from person to person.

    --
    This is my sig, there are many like it but this one is mine
  17. I think the medication rate is constant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Whereas once upon a time it was quite normal in society for everybody to drink alcohol regularly, nowadays it is unfashionable to be an alcoholic so psychiatric medications have taken over.

    A hundred years ago, if I had anxiety I would just drink booze to get over it. Now I take Paxil. Not only am I spending a lot less money (because a single pill costs less than a bottle of wine or 6-pack of beer), but I can safely drive a car, and I'm not an asshole to my family.

    You may also notice that it seems every other kid is on some medication for ADD/ADHD. Why? My guess is that it's because we can't beat them anymore. Now that it's no longer socially acceptable to hit children who act out we have to medicate them instead.

    dom

    1. Re:I think the medication rate is constant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whereas once upon a time it was quite normal in society for everybody to drink alcohol regularly, nowadays it is unfashionable to be an alcoholic so psychiatric medications have taken over.

      A hundred years ago, if I had anxiety I would just drink booze to get over it. Now I take Paxil. Not only am I spending a lot less money (because a single pill costs less than a bottle of wine or 6-pack of beer), but I can safely drive a car, and I'm not an asshole to my family.

      You may also notice that it seems every other kid is on some medication for ADD/ADHD. Why? My guess is that it's because we can't beat them anymore. Now that it's no longer socially acceptable to hit children who act out we have to medicate them instead.

      dom

      I don't know how you can come to this conclusion.

      Corporal punishments just reduce the amount of acting out in the society. Meanwhile, Adderall is just a stimulant, so giving "medicating" children with it would be like medicating children with coffee or meth. The only reason why it works is that there is a certain amount of stimulant that "controls" the ADHD for those who have it.

    2. Re:I think the medication rate is constant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kids aren't getting the exercise they need so they can't sit still. Teachers punish them by making them skip recess. Kids are getting fatter, if you aren't convinced they are consuming more calories and running less. Sure, I'd like to beat kids more, but I don't think that's the solution unless I can beat them skinny.

  18. Don't be fooled by the words "Scientific American" by bluegutang · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This piece is written by a kook who frequently writes on various "spiritual" and pseudoscientific topics. Among his recent posts:

    Seeing the Miracle of Existence in the Darkest of Times
    Does Evolution Have a "Higher Purpose"?
    Astrophysicist Says Experiments Might Soon Reveal Dark Matter's "True Nature"
    What Would a Machine as Smart as God Want?
    My Doubts about Deepak Chopra and the Monetization of Meditation
    World's Smartest Physicist Thinks Science Can't Crack Consciousness
    The Mind–Body Problem, Scientific Regress and "Woo"
    Dear "Skeptics," Bash Homeopathy and Bigfoot Less, Mammograms and War More

    True to form, this article's point is a passive-agressive claim based on absence of evidence:
    "Like most psychiatrists, Higgins does not consider the possibility that medications might be contributing to the decline of mental health."

    Actually, I'm sure most psychiatrists HAVE considered this possibility, and they follow the peer-reviewed evidence which concludes the opposite.

    If anyone wants to argue with this scientific consensus, they are welcome to do their own peer-reviewed studies. But this article and its sources haven't.

  19. Pimping drugs for profit by geekmux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Antidepressants were the most common type of psychiatric drug in the survey..."

    Last two times I've visited my general practitioner I was given a "new" form to fill out that essentially tried to convince me I was depressed; I was visiting for a cough and my yearly physical, neither of which had fuck-all to do with depression, but they sure as shit were trying like hell to get me on medication for it.

    We have the same industry to thank for the opiate/heroin epidemic as well. How fucking ironic the drug pimps addicting America are marketed to "help" us. Perhaps it's time we actually start putting health over profits.

    1. Re:Pimping drugs for profit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem rather gullible, my friend, if those questions seem like they could convince you. Tell you what, I have this great opportunity up in Alaska-- there are some islands that are hard to reach. What Im trying to do is create a way to get to them easily, on foot or by car. All I need is an initial investment of $10M and I can double it in 5 years!

    2. Re:Pimping drugs for profit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is interesting, because it reminds me of scientologist practices.

    3. Re:Pimping drugs for profit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ur a gullible. You big name callin meanie.

    4. Re:Pimping drugs for profit by Bombcar · · Score: 1

      Read David Healy's Pharmageddon.

    5. Re:Pimping drugs for profit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last two times I've visited my general practitioner I was given a "new" form to fill out that essentially tried to convince me I was depressed; I was visiting for a cough and my yearly physical, neither of which had fuck-all to do with depression, but they sure as shit were trying like hell to get me on medication for it.

      No that's the government. You get paid a small amount more if you do depression screenings, smoking and others. Many doctors find it to be a hassle that's not worth it and don't do it on everyone who walks in the door. Some do.

    6. Re:Pimping drugs for profit by PPalmgren · · Score: 1

      Doctors and nurses are trained to investigate mental health on every visit in some fashion. It's one of the hardest things to diagnose and also one of the least likely for patients to discuss on their own without some sort of impetus. There's no grand conspiracy there, it's simply the only way they can investigate certain aspects of the patients proactively. That's not to say that over-medicating and symptom-centric practice isn't an issue, but its roots lay elsewhere. Source: my girlfriend is a psychiatric nurse.

    7. Re:Pimping drugs for profit by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      Last two times I've visited my general practitioner I was given a "new" form to fill out that essentially tried to convince me I was depressed; I was visiting for a cough and my yearly physical, neither of which had

      I have to go in for a general physical every other year (insurance requirement), including one about 6 months ago, and have never had anything approaching that description happen to me.

      My suspicion would be that you either got a really weird GP, or a depression-shaped chip on your shoulder. Assuming its not the latter, then if it bothers you, I suggest you get a new GP.

    8. Re:Pimping drugs for profit by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Last two times I've visited my general practitioner I was given a "new" form to fill out that essentially tried to convince me I was depressed; I was visiting for a cough and my yearly physical, neither of which had

      I have to go in for a general physical every other year (insurance requirement), including one about 6 months ago, and have never had anything approaching that description happen to me.

      My suspicion would be that you either got a really weird GP, or a depression-shaped chip on your shoulder. Assuming its not the latter, then if it bothers you, I suggest you get a new GP.

      Certain parts of our country are rather unfortunately known for being pill mills. This statement is not buried in fake news or conspiracy, and I don't feel I've got the kind of personality that comes across as troubled, so to your point perhaps it is time to find a new GP. Mine does tend to cater to the elderly community; otherwise known as the group that likely holds good benefits (read: profit margins) for certain classes of drugs.

  20. In Arizona... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There is a strong motivation for school psychiatrists to diagnose students with a disorder that requires drugs. If a student has a disorder that needs this kind of treatment, the money the school receives from the state is tripled.

    The amount of students we have here that have some kind of disorder is now massive, and it's very strongly linked to how schools get their money; not to any actual disorders. Obviously, some are true disorders that need treatment - but the motivation to get so many students on drugs that it's difficult to get any diagnosis from medical staff in the schools pay.

    1. Re:In Arizona... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It isn't just the schools that are motivated, the parents see some benefit as well. So imagine 8 year-old Kenny is doing poorly in school. His parents could spend a few bucks to send him to a learning center, but if they can get him on an Individualize Education Plan (IEP) because he has a "learning disability" then this will require the school to provide extra services for Kenny, free tutoring, maybe even a personal coach during the school day. As more students fall into the "learning disability" group, more resources are dedicated to those students, leaving the normal students to their own devices.

  21. Measuring by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

    In the past, most mental health issues went unreported and untreated. The availability of medication is one of the many factors increasing the number of people who come in for diagnosis. If you're schizophrenic but there are no meds for it, who's going to bother taking you in to a doctor? People used to just seal up their mentally ill relatives in a back room of the house for life and try to forget about them. But when there are meds, that drives people to seek treatment and be measured.

    We've also increased the number of things we'll label as mental health problems, of course, as we feel more capable of treating things that may appear less extreme. People who were previously just labeled as weirdos and shunned are now told there might be something we can do for them. Of course meds frequently fail or cause problems worse than the original problem, but they give people enough hope to try.

    --
    This space intentionally left blank
  22. One giant leap... by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    How do you make the leap from "America's mental health is deteriorating" to "Psychiatric medicine is causing it." Maybe the article addresses it, but I doubt it. Bad summary. The thing is that I have heard this vacuous leap made before.

    1. Re:One giant leap... by meglon · · Score: 1

      Tom Cruise isn't known for his writing skill.

      --
      Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
    2. Re:One giant leap... by Billly+Gates · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I have numerous issues created by just 3 months on Celexia. I am changed, asexual, and developed drinking and financial problems that were not present before medication. Also I have been off the meds for 4 months I may add and will never know if I will return to my normal self again.

      There is a whole site called survingantideppressents.com

    3. Re:One giant leap... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am changed, asexual, and developed drinking and financial problems that were not present before medication.

      Sexual dysfunction is a potential side-effect of Celexa, and can be exacerbated by depression. Drinking and financial problems are not side-effects of anti-depressants, they are symptomatic of depression. Spending money and drinking (careful, alcohol is a depressant) are basically attempts at self-medication (they both trigger a release of dopamine in the brain).

      It sounds to me like you were on the wrong medication. Sometimes SSRIs do make things temporarily worse, but that can also be confused with the depression getting worse on its own. SSRIs never worked for me, however, Effexor (an SNRI) in combination with Welbutrin (a dopamine reuptake inhibitor) did.

      In addition to the medication you need therapy. I have found that medication makes recovery possible, but not without a psychological breakthrough. The way you see yourself and the world needs to change before you can fully recover.

      I really hope things work out for you and I sympathize deeply; I have schizoaffective disorder, so I know major depression all too well.

    4. Re:One giant leap... by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      And I'm no longer having thoughts like "I should kill myself. Eh, too much effort". A few years of antidepressants and therapy let me work through my issues.

      For every horrific anecdote, there are positive anecdotes.

    5. Re:One giant leap... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have numerous issues created by just 3 months on Celexia. I am changed, asexual, and developed drinking and financial problems that were not present before medication. Also I have been off the meds for 4 months I may add and will never know if I will return to my normal self again.

      There is a whole site called survingantideppressents.com

      I mistakenly took SSRI's, SNRI's, and a DNRI for years, in numerous combinations, with and without adjuncts. I used to think I was broken, between some combination of inherent flaws and undesirable medication effects. Read up on the pharmacology of selegiline and ropinirole; then, consider how these mechanisms of action differ from nearly every conventional or regulatory-body approved antidepressant.

      I took the serotonergics for nearly fifteen years. I was on nothing for five years. After only 2 years on my current regimen of selegiline and ropinirole, which, I came up with myself, I'm finally able to function reliably. It was funny how I started, actually because every psychiatrist I asked would absolutely refuse to try me out on it. I finally had to order it from "somewhere in the South Pacific" start it by myself (not recommended. please, see a proper doctor).

      Finding the right combination is a bit like having a steam shovel when you're 10 meters down in a hole. Not having to dig out with your bare hands isn't only a mechanical advantage; it's the sort of help, that, makes you feel better about what you're doing.

  23. I've believed this for *decades* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Posting anonymously because I really don't need the shitstorm of antidepressant 'true believers' flaming me to death for triggering them by daring to express my opinions on the subject.

    I've been on the receiving end of the antidepressant agenda and in the aftermath of it I'm a firm believer that they're playing Russian Roulette with your brain chemistry, all because it's cheaper to give you pills than it is to have you sit down with a counselor or therapist, talk through your problems, and learn effective coping strategies to deal with depression. At best, antidepressants should be a 'band-aid' to put on your problems, to break the self-reinforcing downward spiral, while cognitive therapy can start having a positive effect. People who have known me before, during, and after Prozac will tell me now that I was rather scary when I was on it, not reacting to things in ways a healthy human being would, but they didn't know what to do for me at the time. At one point I even had myself convinced that sexual desire was the result of some sort of ancient sexually-transmitted virus that the human race has had for so long that we've accepted it as normal. Of course that's insane, but I remember truly believing that. That, and I'd be fine with just about any level of stress in my life, right up to the point where I'd break, and then I'd be completely and totally off the hook over whatever it was that'd triggered me. Not good, any of it. In part because of what that junk did to my personality I ended up losing a decent job, and the medical insurance I had along with that, and had to go cold-turkey off Prozac, which by all accounts should have made me suicidal, but I managed to cope with it. Took me literally years to feel 'normal' again, think in ways that are considered 'normal', and have sexual functioning return to normal, too. Even to this day I feel like I don't see the world exactly the same, like something has permanently, but very subtly, changed the way I perceive reality. I am given to understand that my experiences are far from being unusual. There were a few incidents of being talked into antidepressant use subsequent to that but I never stayed on any of them long enough to do any damage, and they never seemed to really help anyway. In the aftermath of antidepressant use I've learned to recognize the early signs of feeling depressed over something and work through it cognitively rather than running to a pharmacy. I believe that's the best long-term solution for the vast majority of people who are feeling depressed, not popping pills ad infinitum like the pharmaceutical industry would have us do. The healthcare industry is also to blame for this, the beancounters specifically, because prescribing a pill is infintely cheaper for them than expensive facetime for therapy with a professional, essentially trading people's best interests for profits.

    So, to summarize: If you have chronic depression that doesn't respond adequately to cognitive therapy? I feel for you, and perhaps pills really are your only option. Everyone else, who has acute depression (or is just feeling 'a little down' over something temporarily)? You should try to work through it rather than running to the doctor for Happy Pills. Major life event? Death in the family? Short-term antidepressant use (emphasis on short-term) is probably OK, but you should get off them at some point. Playing around with your neurochemistry, regardless of a 'medical professional' supervising it, is not 'Amateur Night' stuff to be fooling around with. You can cause actual damage to yourself.

    1. Re:I've believed this for *decades* by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      I've been on the receiving end of the antidepressant agenda and in the aftermath of it I'm a firm believer that they're playing Russian Roulette with your brain chemistry, all because it's cheaper to give you pills than it is to have you sit down with a counselor or therapist, talk through your problems, and learn effective coping strategies to deal with depression. At best, antidepressants should be a 'band-aid' to put on your problems, to break the self-reinforcing downward spiral, while cognitive therapy can start having a positive effect.

      I don't know how the industry at large behaves, but when I've seen those close to me with problems like depression or bipolar disorders, every single time the message has been, "Let's use this for now to get you stable, and focus on therapy (along with the healing power of time?) to get you back out of it." I've never heard anyone suggest throwing pills at something without doing any other work would be a good way to go.

  24. Re:Fix what is making people sad. by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    Like something going wrong in the brain, perhaps?

  25. Re:The problem by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    The problem is that we don't know when a few sessions of therapy or a change in life circumstances would suffice, yet we are so quick to claim they would.

  26. How about neither by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    How about a cause that is neither an infection nor an infarction?

  27. Its Legal so its ok... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a guardian of parent with dementia in the US. Found my Mom unable to walk shortly after admitting her to nearby senior living center. Found it odd since she was in perfect health just weeks earlier.
    Looked over her chart only to find a laundry list of a psychiatric pill cocktail. Immediately halted the in house shrink from seeing her. Then made appointments to visit another local office. Took her off all the drugs. Six ... yes Six different drugs meant to help her acclimate to her new environment. Spent 3 months teaching her to walk again.

    Walked another 5 years before her final days. According to the in house shrink that started his experimentation it was "The normal progression of her disease"
    He "Sees it all the time"

    I wonder how many other family members lost time with a loved one due to this legal way of chemically restraining those with no voice?

    With the poor diet here in the US and long time sedentary lifestyle how many of peoples issues stem from poor diet and exercise ? The fix is a " Magic feel good pill" that if it doesn't work then ... maybe a new type will fix... Or the next brand... or a higher dose... Made by companies who have been fined Billions for misconduct.

    How many others are just handed a prescription rather than find if there is an underlying physical medical condition that could be corrected without a prescription?
      One of the primary issues are lazy physicians who just want to get the appointment over with or base their decisions on material and studies provided by corrupt corporations.

  28. Re:No, no no! Your doc needs his swimming pool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. One that works - quick, fast, cheap, done.

    Eating a bullet?

    Silly Human!

    Bullets are not edible!

  29. Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The single biggest influence on the state of psychiatry today is moral conservativism and other assorted panderings to popular culture and the law. Their desire to stay profitable and respectable in mainstream society long ago destroyed any real credibility they had as a serious hard science.

    Pretty much every highly effective anti-depressant ever made (including but certainly not limited to opioids and dopaminergics) is a scheduled substance and almost never prescribed for depression, because apparently every single human being alive is just a helpless addict just waiting for the chance to swallow twenty pills at a time chasing a high. SSRIs have abysmal efficacies, but that didn't stop them from pushing the placebo revolutionary drug Prozac to being one of the most prescribed drugs in the country. A lot of people are still under this weird impression that antidepressants work by re-establishing some natural balance of neurotransmitters present in "normal" people, when there's every indication that this is not the case. (FDA is partially at fault here allowed pharma companies to put out some ads that strongly implied this was how SSRIs worked.)

    And it's not as if modern antidepressants aren't addictive; like many psychotropic drugs, SSRIs and SNRIs induce physical dependency with potentially severe withdrawal symptoms if abruptly terminated.

    No, the actual difference between modern antidepressants and "addictive" drugs that actually make you feel good is... the latter actually work. Consistently and compellingly. And it's for that very reason that they are deemed dangerous. Drugs that are highly effective in enabling human happiness work better at higher dosages (which is how dosage increase works among most drugs that are actually effective, if you think about)... which of course leads to massive problems among the subpopulations of people who have poor impulse control or are overly euphoria-craving.

    And all of this plays directly into the hands of religious and social conservatives who have for millenia made careers out of claiming that anything that people like too much must be bad. You'd think that more people would be suspicious of a profession claiming to be a science that was, just a couple generations ago, trying to chemically castrate people against their will to cure them of their homosexuality... ah well.

    1. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 2

      One other thing interesting to note about modern psychiatric medicines: they generally insist that you take it daily, instead of taking it only when one's symptoms are especially severe. This aversion to symptom management and emphasis on sustained chemical dependency as the best approach to managing even psychiatric illnesses that have infrequent, transient symptoms is... interesting to behold.

      The main exception here is probably for panic attacks among those suffering from anxiety disorders, and these medicines are of course (since they are actually rather effective) scheduled substances doled out in relatively small amounts, particularly to patients of the lower and middle classes.

    2. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And all of this plays directly into the hands of religious and social conservatives who have for millenia made careers out of claiming that anything that people like too much must be bad. You'd think that more people would be suspicious of a profession claiming to be a science that was, just a couple generations ago, trying to chemically castrate people against their will to cure them of their homosexuality... ah well.

      Now if only any "conservatives" ever actually said that, or if it weren't the case that is was the professional psychiatric community (including their primary authoritative reference, the DSM) that was saying homosexuality was a psychological disorder.

      Ah well.

    3. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      The idea that homosexual behavior is highly dangerous and needs eradication, involuntary if need be, is a socially conservative idea. In other words, it is rooted in traditional collectivist status-quo preserving morality without any reasonable reason to consider it a wise policy.

      If "conservative" means something else to you, whatever. I'm not ascribing to conservativism an eternal and immutable set of ideals; I'm talking about it as a social force. Once upon a time, the socially conservative position was to support monarchies and oppose abolitionism. Social/moral conservativism is widely accepted to refer to a defense of tradition and the status quo. Sometimes it gets this right (because some things we have are indeed worth defending)... other times, not so much.

    4. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The idea that homosexual behavior is highly dangerous and needs eradication, involuntary if need be, is a socially conservative idea.

      Still waiting for a citation of someone actually saying anything enjoyable is bad.

      Preferably along with some arbitrary chaining of history you consider "conservative", and instead remotely relevant to discussion of moderately-recent times. I can spin up some demagoguery playing with my personal definition of "liberal thought" applying to cherry-picked history as well, it'd be just exactly as useless.

    5. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Still waiting for a citation of someone actually saying anything enjoyable is bad.

      That wasn't a quote. It was an observation that any (intellectually honest) amateur observer of human behavior can verify. Gambling, alcohol, other drugs, sex (especially sex), dancing, TV or video games, spicy foods... anything and everything stimulating and popular have been targeted at one time or another by social conservatives. Not consistently or to the same degree, of course.

      I can spin up some demagoguery playing with my personal definition of "liberal thought" applying to cherry-picked history as well, it'd be just exactly as useless.

      Again, this isn't identity politics. I'm not building an echo chamber here. Of course many strands of "liberalism" (particularly progressivist strans) have advocated for bad things. There's a tendency towards cultural masochism, for one thing.

      Preferably along with some arbitrary chaining of history you consider "conservative"

      This is the textbook definition of social conservativism: defense of the status quo and of tradition, with less emphasis on individual freedom of choice. (As opposed to economic conservativism, where freedom of choice is at least theoretically championed.) Go start a war on wikipedia's Social Conservativism page if you want to continue to quibble about this point. You aren't arguing with me; you're arguing with the English language.

    6. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gambling, alcohol, other drugs, sex (especially sex), dancing, TV or video games, spicy foods... anything and everything stimulating and popular have been targeted at one time or another by social conservatives.

      Yes, by particularly attention-getting extreme outliers of "conservatism", particularly attention-getting by those wishing to erroneously present them as representative to construct an "alternative" to. Based on saying the motivation is the opposite of what it actually is, and is explicitly stated as what it is. These are objected to on the basis of their -harm-, not based on their -pleasure-.

      Gambling, alcohol, drugs, cause -objective- harm, often. Always, no. Often, yes. You seem to equivocate "advising against" with "denying choice" rather... liberally, but no serious discussion can proceed without you being clear on this point and actually demonstrating some significant representation arguing for that. If "it's bad because I say so" is highly dubious, "it's good because it's the opposite of what that guy says" is descending into logical lunacy.

      The "dancing, video games, and spicy foods" is just ridiculous appeal to wholly misrepresentative outliers, having nothing to do with "conservative" per se or the the Wikipedia "definition" you are -also- arbitrarily cherry-picking. Watching "Footloose" gives you insight into neither conservative nor mainstream religion.

      As for "especially sex", lets not forget with respect to the actual motivators for disagreement, -actual harm-, "liberal" sexuality has killed 35 million people through AIDS alone, leaving all other STD's entirely aside. People dead. Massive numbers of people dead, as a -direct consequence- of the behavior. This is not an objection based on "pleasure", because -absolutely any other- proposed behavior where one argued, "well, yeah, maybe this behavior will kill a few million people, but it makes feel good for a few seconds, so fuck them (literally)" would be instantly quarantined. There is no moral justification of expanding such a pandemic whatsoever. When you decide to approach actual reason and cause and effect relationships, rather than "whatever is the opposite of conservatism or religion is automatically good" childish non-thinking, review the facts.

    7. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      It's not like you can take the medication and build up to the desired level in one day.

      BTW, antidepressants such as Wellbutrin are not controlled substances, not even schedule 5 (lowest classification).

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    8. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Explain then, please, the little problem that most of the scheduled "mood altering agents' require higher and higher doses to get the same effect. Escalation in doses that eventually run into the deleterious side effects of the drugs. Remember ALL drugs are poisons.

      While you post has some measure of truth - there is certainly way too much moralizing being done at the governmental regulatory level for drugs - the FDA didn't just pop out of no where. In the early 1900's you could get heroin, cocaine and a host of other entertaining chemicals at your local pharmacy without a prescription. Of course, this allowed for the creation of tens of thousands of addicts whose lives were drastically changed - even with drug availability. Drug addiction is a truly awful disease. Wander down to any ER and see the societal effects of alcoholism, and to a lesser extent, tobacco abuse.

      You can argue that a person's body is their own to mess up. I'd even agree with that. But people don't exist in a vacuum and society has some ill defined skin in this game. We currently aren't doing all that well in this regard (as in many) but it is much more complex than your thesis.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    9. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      You seem to equivocate "advising against" with "denying choice" rather

      You seem to be under the mistaken impression that I give a shit about this polarizing game you're playing. Analogy: "communist" encompasses people who advocate for the murder of anti-communists in order to further the cause of communism... and also those communists who actively oppose such murder. Are you understanding yet that words have actual, specific meanings?

      People who had liberal ideas about human sexuality did not advocate forcible chemical castration of homosexuals. People who had conservative ideas about human sexuality did. Not all of them, of course not all of them. Do I have to draw you a Venn diagram?

      Massive numbers of people dead, as a -direct consequence- of the behavior.

      Conveniently omitting the Catholic church's opposition to condoms in Africa, I see. Also, I think I may have read something, somewhere about pre-HIV Christians still not really liking sexual freedom all that much. Also, I haven't seen many evangelicals promoting lesbian sex as safer than heterosexual sex (which it is.)

      I couldn't resist taking that bait, but I've little interest in continuing this further. You want to turn this into partisan identity politics and insist we all use your newspeak babble, go take it up with the people who write dictionaries and encyclopedias and have extensively documented what words like "conservative" refer to.

      I've already said that social conservativism can in principle do good and liberal social ideas (particularly regarding immigration, I would argue) can do bad, but you still want to turn this into some echo chamber pissing match.

      I'm sorry to be the one to break this to you, but words do have meanings. If you want a label that unambiguously defines everything you like about right-wing elements in society whist excluding all the bits you don't like, keep looking.

    10. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Little issue of metabolism of drugs requiring consistent dosing schedules to get consistent drug levels. Yep, Xanax is an outlyer - most psychotropic drugs have a longer half life and slower onset of effect. Thus, you take them for a while on a regular basis.

      Physics can be a bitch sometimes.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    11. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Still waiting for a citation of someone actually saying anything enjoyable is bad.

      Ever heard of Oliver Cromwell?

      He banned Christmas, and he wasn't even a Muslim!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    12. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Explain then, please, the little problem that most of the scheduled "mood altering agents' require higher and higher doses to get the same effect.

      Only when that "same effect" is a rush. They give Ritalin and Adderall (very similar to meth, btw) to millions of kids at a constant dose, without escalation.

      Remember ALL drugs are poisons.

      Along with salt, water and oxygen. Yawn.

      Drug addiction is a truly awful disease.

      While it's not an easy habit to kick, it's precisely this medicalization as "a disease" is a major problem. And even if it were a disease, the cure we're currently peddling is surely worse.

      Give all those poor opioid addicts buprenorphine tablets. Not just for detox, but for life. (Buprenorphine displaces and blocks heroin and other opioids from functioning, so they can't stack it.) Let them take it for the rest of their lives, just as they're currently encouraging people (including those very addicts, most of whom suffer from depression or anxiety) to take SSRIs, SNRIs and atypical antipsychotics for the rest of their lives. I suspect the outcomes will be much more positive than what we're seeing now.

      We currently aren't doing all that well in this regard (as in many) but it is much more complex than your thesis.

      I didn't oversimplify anything; I explicitly acknowledged the danger and harm done.

      You're the one trying to oversimplify it all into "addiction is a disease." Addiction is a psychological quirk of humanity, not something akin to influenza or diabetes.

      Drug addition has a HELL of a lot more in common with all those laughable behavioral addictions (food, sex, TV, internet) than it does with actual organic diseases. This isn't just me saying this; study after study has shown the real negative consequences and physiological changes caused by behavioral addictions, but both society at large and (most) psychs refuse to treat them or indeed think of them in the same way.

    13. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      It's not like you can take the medication and build up to the desired level in one day.

      Apply that sentence and its implicit logic to literally any other medical condition we prescribe drugs for and I think you might detect a bit of absurdity there.

      BTW, antidepressants such as Wellbutrin are not controlled substances, not even schedule 5 (lowest classification).

      Did you mention that because I didn't exhaustively cover all of the non-SSRI/SNRI drugs? Most of my criticisms apply to other classes of drug as well, with sometimes the caveat of "semi-effective, but with horrible side effects (...that discourage "abuse", and thus result in it remaining unscheduled.)"

      Wellbutrin is, incidentally, vulnerable to being banned if it ever becomes popular enough due to its dopaminergic properties. It's "abused" by stacking it with other substances. I've even heard stories of insufflation. The main reason why it hasn't seen more "abuse" already is due to its tendency to cause seizures before a particularly euphoric threshold can be reached, but there are doubtless ways around that. Drug users can be crafty like that.

    14. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Little issue of metabolism of drugs requiring consistent dosing schedules to get consistent drug levels.

      This is almost exactly what Barbara just said. Weird. Uh, well, this is just restating the issue, and not responding at all to my point.

      Even with a transient anxiety problem a psych will generally recommend that someone develop a daily SSRI dependency rather than treat it episodically with the drugs we have that *do* work episodically. Because those drugs are the big, bad scheduled ones. (Well, schedule 4.)

    15. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Not banned, but scheduled 4-5. (i.e. banned for most poor people.)

    16. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      And those SSRIs have *horrible* efficacy vs. moderate to severe anxiety, whereas the immediate action drugs have excellent efficacy.

    17. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by fredgiblet · · Score: 1

      One problem with taking them when things are especially bad is that when you're depressed you may not have the motivation to get out of bed and take your pills.

    18. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      That doesn't seem be a good argument for a daily pill, particularly not if the withdrawal effects are (as they often are) anxiety or depression.

    19. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with your sentiment but, in the future, please don't claim SSRI's are addictive. You'll immediately get shot down for misusing terminology like that. There's only a physical dependence and quite often it's a lifetime of dependence. Don't lose out on something as trivial as semantics.

      The difference is an addiction diagnosis has that moral component you're talking about-- it includes socially maladaptive behavior (drug seeking, skipping out on responsibilities, taking more than originally intended). This is rarely the case for an SSRI, but common for other prescription drugs. The acid test for addictive substances: would someone be tempted to steal a pill?

    20. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      I agree with your sentiment but, in the future, please don't claim SSRI's are addictive. You'll immediately get shot down for misusing terminology like that.

      Nope, sorry.The redefinition of addictive to exclude SSRIs is part and parcel of my indictment of the mental health industry.

      The difference is an addiction diagnosis has that moral component you're talking about-- it includes socially maladaptive behavior (drug seeking, skipping out on responsibilities, taking more than originally intended). This is rarely the case for an SSRI, but common for other prescription drugs.

      Because SSRIs suck. And also because they're not controlled. These are hardly objective qualities you're rattling off here, nor is this pet definition universally (or even commonly, I'd say) subscribed to. It sounds like self-justifying bullshit cooked up by the mental health industry, which is the very institution I'm indicting here.

      Are you willing to concede that addiction does not exist *at all* without the user displaying such disruptive qualities, even in the presence of heavy use and physical dependence? (With any drug, heroin and meth included.)

      Next question: do you think the mental health industry makes any such concession? What does the court-ordered psychiatrist say in his report to the probation officer, I wonder?

      The acid test for addictive substances: would someone be tempted to steal a pill?

      So here is your implicit logic of that acid test: SSRIs, SNRIs, atypical antipsychotics and other modern antidepressants are so horribly ineffective at treating depression that no one would be tempted to steal one if they were controlled and their doctor stopped prescribing them.

      Uh, thanks for proving my point.

      If I had a debilitating mental disease that was being successfully being treated with a drug that was suddenly outlawed, of course I'd be tempted to steal it. (That's not to say I necessarily would.) If that sounds incredible to you, replace depression/anxiety with some other debilitating disease. Stealing medicine that isn't available legally, in order to treat a debilitating condition, is an essential part of moral philosophy 101. You'd be highly abnormal to not be tempted to steal it... if the medication in question were actually very effective.

    21. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by fredgiblet · · Score: 1

      "If you don't take it regularly you may not be physically able to take it when you need it." isn't a good argument?

    22. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      "If you don't take it regularly you may not be physically able to take it when you need it." isn't a good argument?

      That presupposes the drug's efficacy, when the data shows pretty damn convincingly that first and second line antidepressants have horrible efficacy vs. a major depressive episode like that.

      This isn't about taking the same drug episodically vs. daily. This is about drugs that work immediately and powerfully (but are euphoric and "addictive" and thus subject to an insane regime of control and scrutiny in this country) vs. drugs that barely do much at all for most people and have to be taken constantly to even achieve that modest effect.

    23. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Not banned, but scheduled 4-5. (i.e. banned for most poor people.)

      .

      The National Library of Medicine (National Institutes of Health) lists bupropion as not being a controlled substance. .Here is a Justice Department's list of all controlled substances.. Bupropion, aka Wellbutrin, is nowhere to be found.

      What freaks in prison do is of no consequence - they also try to shoot up with peanut butter if someone tells them it gives a sugar high and huff aerosols. It's simply not open to widespread abuse.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    24. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      It's not weird - it's pretty common knowledge for anyone who has been prescribed an anti-depressant, and there are lots of people on that list. And SSRIs don't create much of a (if any) dependency (physical or mental) if you're taking them for depression, and not for recreational use.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    25. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Also, drugs that have a longer half-life in the blood stream you have to take longer than 1 day to let the amount in the body to build up. Taking a massive dose to get it up immediately is a dumb idea. You also want to have time to judge both the efficacy and the side effects so you can decide to increase the dose or discontinue it.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    26. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1
      I didn't say it was controlled. I said it has the potential to be controlled. I'm pretty sure saw a study somewhere that showed rats will self-administer it, which is the sort of thing the DEA cares about. If there's one thing they love over there, it's modeling human beings as animals without self-control.

      There are tons of non-scheduled drugs that the DEA hasn't gotten around to scheduling because they haven't become popular enough yet. Tramadol will surely become scheduled if they ever get around to it. (Update: Hey look! They *did* get around to it!) Welbutrin is probably fairly low on the list, but only because drug users still have a lot of easier options at their disposal. If the DEA ever gets their way and manages to crack down in all the ways they desire to crack down, they will *eventually* turn their attention to drugs like Wellbutrin after drug users turn to it in desperation. But no, it's not their primary or secondary concern at the moment.

      What freaks in prison do is of no consequence - they also try to shoot up with peanut butter if someone tells them it gives a sugar high and huff aerosols. It's simply not open to widespread abuse.

      Ok fine, let me put it another way: after I was seriously injured some time ago, I accidentally confirmed firsthand that bupropion HCl significantly potentiates the euphoria of opioids. (Nothing illegal, fwiw.) It was... well, mindblowing, whereas the same opioid at the same dose with the same tolerance level without Wellbutrin was just blandly (if warmly) sedating. Bupropion also made alcohol significantly more enjoyable. You can choose to believe all that or not.

      Given its mechanism of action, there's no reason not to assume that it wouldn't blend well with euphoria-producing drugs.

      Also, I'm still not totally clear on why you brought it up. It's good SSRI alternative for people who want to keep their sex drives but, as with SSRIs, it's not very effective vs. major depression.

    27. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      I was specifically talking about people with sporadic symptoms in that second post, and the implication (which I thought was clear but apparently wasn't, since several other people have made comments similar to yours) was that I was comparing continual-dose models of modern first and second line antidepressants/anxiolytics (including SSRIs, SNRIs, atypical antipsychotics, bupropion, perhaps some of the tricyclics, etc.) to episodic dosing of "abusable" drugs like opioids, benzos, amphetamines, etc.

      At no time was I arguing that SSRIs should be given episodically. Let's get that straight first.

      As far as the half-life goes, obviously if you have an episodic disorder that you want to treat episodically, you're not going to prescribe something with a massive halflife. (Unless that is desirable as a means of reducing rebound symptoms as the drug wears off.) You can "judge the efficacy" based on the result of multiple treated episodes.

    28. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Are my theses still unclear? Ok, look:

      1. Benzos, opiates and other controlled sedatives will greatly outperform SSRIs, mood stabilizers or atypical antipsychotics for the management of anxiety, particularly episodic anxiety (but with proper dosing and a non-"abusing" patient, also long term.) and particularly severe anxiety.

      2. Damn near any euphoric controlled drug will work better for depression, particularly episodic or severe depression, better than SSRIs, mood stabilizers, atypical antipsychotics, or other first, second and third line drugs. With depression, even moreso than with anxiety disorders, a combination of sedating (particularly opioid) and stimulating drugs could be used both for the synergistic euphoria and to help cancel out some of the unpleasant side effects of each drug (drowsiness or jitters.) Recreational "speedballs" are considered dangerous only because of the high doses involved, and because recreational users usually don't (or can't) perfectly match the half-lives of both drugs; this obviously isn't a huge issue given the number of drugs available to manufacturers, in addiction to the time-release pill technologies.

      3. Yes, under this scheme a significant people would get addicted to the rush (regardless of any safeguards) and that would cause some problems.

      a. That doesn't excuse psychiatry from the pseudo-science it's become steeped in and the legions of scientists and doctors that toe the DEA line for political, legal and financial reasons.

      b. Those problems sure as hell aren't as bad as our overreaction to them, and an honest look at the disability-adjusted life year numbers for anxiety disorders and depression, the costs incurred by addiction (...costs which, on average, plummet when the addicts aren't being persecuted) and the projected number of new addicts would, I strongly suspect, show that more good than harm would come about if euphoric-producing drugs were more commonly used for common psychiatric disorders. I don't have hard data here, obviously. Just strong suspicions.

    29. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Rats only self-administered when it was injected directly into the blood stream.

      Even grapefruit increases the action of other drugs. Going to control grapefruit?

      Also, nothing is very effective against refractive cases of major depression. Not therapy. Not drugs. All you can do sometimes is reduce the desire for self-harm to a more controllable level and hope that eventually the ship rights itself, so to speak, until the next time.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    30. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Withdrawal from high doses of a short halflife SSRIs will cause very noticable and unpleasant side effects on withdrawal.

      But I mentioned this only to underline that real, significant biochemical changes are taking place. The presence of withdrawal alone isn't a good argument against any drug; to the extent that it becomes a problem for a certain drug, it's just an argument for better prescribing and and dosing practices; like, maybe include a little separate "weaning off" package of pills (in a numbered bubble sheet: day 1, day 2, etc.) with every prescription so the patient can easily taper down the dose if they wish to stop.

    31. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Also, nothing is very effective against refractive cases of major depression. Not therapy. Not drugs. All you can do sometimes is reduce the desire for self-harm to a more controllable level and hope that eventually the ship rights itself, so to speak, until the next time.

      Show me the large-scale study where they tried oxycodone + adderall (or something similar, with the half-lives and time release pills calibrated correctly so the effects of both fade equally. ) Offer patients in the trial the option of changing to a different % blend if they feel it's too sedating or too anxiety provoking.

      I am quite certain that such a combination would achieve noticeable improvement in over 50% of MDD patients, including a significant decrease in self-harm.

      "Quite certain? Your'e just making stuff up!" Well, sorry. My intuition is all I have, given psychiatry sold its soul long ago and refuses to do the studies that would prove it. After all, that's my overarching thesis here.

    32. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      You really don't know what you're talking about. Major depressive disorder is not something that comes and goes in a day or even a week. It's a minimum of 2 weeks of serious symptoms, and can go on for 2 years or more, even with drugs and therapy. You don't vary the medication on a "daily" basis based on how you feel on any particular day, because major depression isn't something that you can predict on a 24-hour basis and say "tomorrow is going to be a bad day so I should have taken extra medication yesterday and today." Also, extended release formulations of bupropion are used to lessen the danger of seizure that happens without extended release. Even so, you may experience "the twitches" - involuntary muscle twitches - at higher doses until your body adjusts.

      One of the reasons to go off drugs slowly is because when you quit suddenly, the body tries to compensate by releasing any of the drug stored in the body tissues. Morphine and dilaudid do this if you've been on them for a while, and the effect, when it happens, is immediate - zero warning. So don't do stupid things like driving when coming off certain medications (though if it happens you will be too stoned to realize it's a bad idea).

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    33. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      You haven't been keeping up with what's going on. LSD has been investigated to help treat depression, and MDMA (Ecstasy) is currently undergoing trials for depression and anxiety disorders. There are obvious risks of abuse, same as oxycodon and oxycontin, which the company claimed, without any evidence, that it wasn't all that addictive. That's a good reason to go slow. We don't need to fix one problem just to create another.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    34. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1
      I was not conflating major depression and episodic depression. "Or" does not mean "equals". The reasons why controlled euphoric drugs would be particularly superior in both cases are distinct.

      1. They are particularly superior for episodic disorders because they work quickly and (because they aren't being taken regularly) they remain at high potency, without tolerance or withdrawal issues. (Assuming a non-"abusing" patient.) I'm not talking about MDD so much here, but rather stuff like (certain types of) bipolar depression. Many anxiety disorders are also episodic.

      2. They are also particularly superior for severe disorders because many of the most common severe psychaitric disorders involve dysphoria of one form or another, and dysphoria is most easily treated with--drum roll please--euphoria-producting drugs.

      They are also superior when used on mild and more continuous disorders, but their margin of superiority isn't quite as wide here because the standard first and second line psychiatric treatments have a greater chance (vs. the severe disorders) of actually making a significant dent in 'em.

      One of the reasons to go off drugs slowly is because when you quit suddenly, the body tries to compensate by releasing any of the drug stored in the body tissues.

      That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Did you misspeak or something? Possibly it releases endogenous opioids or something...

    35. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      They already do this, but the time at each step of lowering the dose is measured in weeks, not days.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    36. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      And just why tshould I believe some random person on the internet who believes their way will make a difference when YOU don't have any studies to support your viewpoint? Show me the studies. In the meantime, you're just making stuff up. Your feeling of certainty is not based on evidence. "intuition" doesn't cut it.

      And from the way you've discussed this, it's obvious you don't even have anecdotal first-hand experience of being diagnosed (instead of saying "gee, I'm depressed this week") and seeking treatment.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    37. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1
      Episodic depression is sever depression that lasts at least two weeks. That's why it's referred to as an episode. Chronic depression lasts at least 2 years. Duration is the defining difference. An episode of depression can last months, even more than a year.

      Dysphoria is best treated by fixing the problem. For gender dysphoria, cross-gender hormone treatment and surgery have a very high success rate. Mood-altering drugs have zero success rate.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    38. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1
      Meh. I've heard tales about MDMA studies in the 80s as well. The situation regarding marijuana is slightly encouraging, but I'm not holding my breath. Pot is a special case anyway.

      There are obvious risks of abuse

      They're never going to allow widespread use of potent euphoria-producing drugs for disorders like depression and anxiety. They might conceivably allow something like LSD, which is widely acknowledged to not be particularly habit-forming, but the big issue there is bad trips can and do happen, and I wouldn't be surprised if they confirm that it can indeed be a psychosis trigger for some people.

      But yeah, back to the less trippy euphorics... it's not going to happen (except among a very small number of rebel psychaitrists and their rich clientele), unless and until the paradigm regarding addiction shifts. We might be slowly shuffling in that direction, but I'm pretty sure it'll never become mainstream in any of our lifetimes. There's way too much momentum behind the "addiction is a disease" mentality permeating not just psychiatry but the cops and the courts and the schools and pop culture.

      And there are way too few people saying things like "what if we just gave some of these poor souls an unlimited supply of buprenorphine[1] and see what happens ?"


      1. In case you've never heard of it, this is a long-halflife opioid that has a built in ceiling dose (so accidental OD is improbable, though it might occur if you're foolish enough to jump from zero to max dose) *and* it binds more tightly to opioid receptors, mostly preventing other opioids from having any effect.

    39. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1
      Intuition and anecdote is all anyone ever has, scientists included, at the very beginning. Provide me the money, and I'll happy to run the trials for you.

      What is easily provable is the lack of efficacy of psychiatry against the most common psychiatric complaints. You can dig up the numbers yourself, if you're so inclined.

      And from the way you've discussed this, it's obvious you don't even have anecdotal first-hand experience of being diagnosed (instead of saying "gee, I'm depressed this week") and seeking treatment.

      Psssssssssh. I don't even know where to begin. Why do you say that? Because I pointed out that SSRIs don't actually fucking work for most people? Because I point out that schedule 1 and 2 euphoric drugs often do?

      What's the number needed to treat to completely resolve the symptoms of X (anxiety, depression, MDD, bipolar depression, whatever) for the favorite SSRI of the month? For Welbutrin? For SSRI + Ability? What is the NNT to even mostly resolve symptoms, such that patients are satisfied?

      I'm not going to get into any more of my personal anecdotes right now, but if you think most people are satisfied with their anxiety or depression treatment, you are the one who is sadly misinformed here.

    40. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1
      I clearly gave bipolar depression as the sort of thing I was referring to (though it depends on the typical timing and duration of the swings.) Bipolar depression with a mild or nonexistent manic phase also has a name that temporarily eludes me at the moment. It's basically just a cyclical depression.

      Dysphoria is best treated by fixing the problem. For gender dysphoria

      I am referring to dysphoria as in the inverse of euphoria, not whatever gimmicky buzzword the DSM has popularized this week. (To be clear, I'm disparaging only the buzzword, not the suffering it refers to.) Dysphoria is present in most mood disorders in one way or another.

      "Feeling like shit."

    41. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Like I said, you're really behind the times. MDMA is on the way to becoming legal for treating PTSD

      The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has given the green light to phase three trials of MDMA to treat post-traumatic stress disorder, the final phase of validation required to turn the party drug into a legal medicine.

      “Moving from phase two to phase three shows we have strong scientific reason to believe that MDMA is an effective treatment for PTSD in therapy. The fact the FDA is ready to move forward with phase three signals that they agree,” said Brad Burge, from the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (Maps), a not-for-profit based in Santa Cruz, California, that has spearheaded efforts to turn MDMA into a medicine.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    42. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Like I said, you don't know what your're talking about. Quit flailing around, it's undignified.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    43. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      No, you did not specifically refer to bipolar depression, so quit lying. The topic was major depressive disorder. Not bipolar (what used to be called manic-depressive) disorder.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    44. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      MDMA for PTSD isn't *quite* the same thing as opioids or amphetamines for depression or anxiety. And do you think it'll be first line? Do you think all psychiatrists will be willing to prescribe it?

      This is a cultural thing even more than a legal thing. Technically, there's no law preventing psychiatrists from prescribing oxycodone off-label for depression. It's just that very few people are insane enough to actually try that, as it opens them up to DEA scrutiny and lawsuits.

    45. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      No, you did not specifically refer to bipolar depression, so quit lying. The topic was major depressive disorder. Not bipolar (what used to be called manic-depressive) disorder.

      Let me try adding bold this time:

      1. They are particularly superior for episodic disorders because they work quickly and (because they aren't being taken regularly) they remain at high potency, without tolerance or withdrawal issues. (Assuming a non-"abusing" patient.) I'm not talking about MDD so much here, but rather stuff like (certain types of) bipolar depression. Many anxiety disorders are also episodic.

      Christ almighty. Quibble much? None of my points hang on a single disorder here. Psychiatric disorders that involve the patient experiencing significant dysphoria of one form or another constitute the majority of outpatient prescriptions. (Delusional and hallucinatory disorders being possibly the only major exceptions.)

    46. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Says the person who can't read my posts properly and refuses to look up the stats herself. Here, let me get you started:

      Prozac, the drug that started this craze, a drug that's still WHO's list of "essential medicines", one of the most prescribed drugs of all time (all numbers adjusted for placebo) and one that is still being actively prescribed and investigated for a variety of off-label usages:

      2 out of 3 people "not much improved" for OCD.

      4 out of 5 people suffering Panic Disorder did not find their panic attacks controlled.

      Mild to Moderate Depression: Clinically Insignificant changes. (According to a Kirsch meta study. I looked at some individual studies around when this first came out and it was pretty damning stuff, but I'm not digging through it all for your benefit right now. You want to remain ignorant, that's your choice.)

      Pilot, preliminary type data-gathering studies exist for amphetamines, opioids and the like. They aren't controlled, but they indicate very strong potential for a variety of anxiety and depressive disorders. Given how they function and the prevalence of dysphoria in anxiety and depression, this is to be expected. And no, the DEA and anti-addiction wings of the medical establishment aren't fucking happy about any noises rebel psychiatrists make in this direction.

      And moving MDMA from schedule 1 to schedule 2 changes nothing about the addiction culture that is their lifeblood. Cocaine is schedule 2 as well. It's technically legal for your doctor to prescribe cocaine off-label for depression. Go ahead, try it. I dare you. But please try to get it on video if you do.

      No, I'm not giving you source links for any of this you lazy, lazy person.

    47. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Why should bupropion be a controlled substance? It is not addictive, it doesn't make you high in any way (at least not in the therapeutic dosage, higher dosages might, but they will also inevitably cause seizures). It is about as stimulating as a nice cup of tea. The only abusable thing about it is that it might function as a weak aphrodisiac.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    48. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The acid test for addictive substances: would someone be tempted to steal a pill?

      Guess dollar bills are addictive now.

    49. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      More bullshit. I already knew about the problems with Prozac, smartypants. And approving MDMA for phase 3 trials with the goal of bringing it to market in 2021 just goes to show how full of shit you are about any conspiracy to prevent such substances from being used to treat people. Or didn't you bother reading the link I gave? There are plenty more where that came from.

      Also, anything that results in even 20% of people having a notable improvement is a HUGE victory. Or would you rather they didn't have a chance to improve?

      And "mild to moderate depression" is NOT the same as major depressive disorder, and neither are the treatments Why not find some people who are dealing with this sort of problem and talk to them to better inform yourself, instead of spreading uniformed opinions. Your stupidity is trivializing the whole issue as "oh, I have a solution that is simple." Major depressive disorder is not trivial, it's not "feeling sad" or "down", it's not a couple of weeks of grieving over a death, etc.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    50. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      What do you think MDMA stands for? It's a stimulant with a chemical structure closely related to metamphetamine and mescaline. And PTSD has depression as one of the comorbidities. Again, you demonstrate your lack of understanding or experience in the subject matter.

      Your arguments are unimpressive, uninformed, and really, really dumb. Get some first-hand experience or stop shooting your mouth of about things you know nothing about.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    51. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Sumus+Semper+Una · · Score: 1

      No, the actual difference between modern antidepressants and "addictive" drugs that actually make you feel good is... the latter actually work. Consistently and compellingly. And it's for that very reason that they are deemed dangerous.

      I guess that depends on how you define "work". Do they make pretty much anyone feel better or at least different? Sure. For a little while, anyway. Most restricted drugs produce short term intense effects. Not very useful for treating ongoing mental illness. And used recreationally, it is easy to abuse and develop a tolerance, causing the user to seek ever higher and more dangerous dosages.

      Now, I will say that this is no different from something like alcohol or other legal recreational substances. And I agree that it's hypocritical to provide legal framework for the consumption of some and give a blanket total ban on all others. But as a means for treating mental illness, I have to disagree with your implied hypothesis that mental illnesses would often be better treated with recreational drugs that are currently illegal.

    52. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Also, anything that results in even 20% of people having a notable improvement is a HUGE victory

      No it isn't. It particularly isn't given the massive costs involved in getting a script (which people are paying for either directly or indirectly), and the discouragement many people face when their glorified placebo doesn't work. Prescribing drugs that are unlikely to successfully treat a condition is, in most other contexts, grounds for a malpractice suit. Prozac should be removed from WHO's list of essential medicines and the authority to market it for people suffering depression revoked (they can still prescribe off-label if they really want.) There's no excuse whatsoever for this state of affairs.

      Major depressive disorder is not trivial, it's not "feeling sad" or "down", it's not a couple of weeks of grieving over a death, etc.

      I've been formally diagnosed with and have been dealing with MDD almost continuously, with a few months of respite here and there, since I was ten years old, fuck you very much. (I suspect my biggest ongoing issue is that I'm not able to engage in constructive self-delusion as effectively as most.)

      In the past I've been closely involved with someone who also suffered from lifelong MDD with the added bonus of social anxiety with panic attacks, in addition to multiple friends and family members going through "regular" depression, one of whom essentially killed herself. I've also known several people with chronic pain, so I'm familiar with circus surrounding controlled substances.

      I have a very, very long list of interesting anecdotes that I'm not going to be getting into here.

      Approving MDMA for phase 3 trials with the goal of bringing it to market in 2021

      It's been a while since I looked at the MDMA stuff, but as I recall it was being used at low dose whilst *in the therapist's office*, not for daily use. Given the confirmed neurotoxicity of MDMA, I strongly suspect this is the mode of treatment that is still being tested, but I can't be bothered to check. Not symptom treatment, but an attempt at a cure through a handful of one-off doses that make you open up to your therapists. If you want to prove my suspicions wrong, feel free.

      There are a dozen other reasons why this pending (not guaranteed) approval isn't all that interesting or contrary to what I'm saying, but an unwillingness to prescribe MDMA on a long term basis (as I suspect will be the case), let alone administration in a home setting, completely proves my point.

      just goes to show how full of shit you are about any conspiracy to prevent such substances from being used to treat people.

      There's no conspiracy. The "all regular people are just latent addicts/abusers" mindset is mainstream and out in the open. Pathologization of "addiction" is in their fucking handbook, for crying out loud. It's in the prescribing guidelines. It's shown in the way the DEA busts pain clinics and lone wolf doctors who prescribe "inappropriate" medicines. It's not a conspiracy theory. They scream it from the rooftops.

      And "mild to moderate depression" is NOT the same as major depressive disorder,

      You already conceded that antidepressants suck for MDD. And I've already explained at length that this isn't about any one disorder. So... what the hell is your point?

      Prozac is not suitable to treat any type of depression except maybe as a fourth line off-label Hail Mary treatment. Agree or disagree?

      Furthermore, given how long its ineffectiveness took to come to light, all SSRIs and SNRIs should be subjected to increased scrutiny and post-market testing and patients should be clearly informed when they are likely wasting their time and money. Agree or disagree?

      I'm not going to respond to the bazillion other threads you're replying to, as I think the essentials are all here.

    53. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Most restricted drugs produce short term intense effects. Not very useful for treating ongoing mental illness. And used recreationally, it is easy to abuse and develop a tolerance, causing the user to seek ever higher and more dangerous dosages.

      Congratulations for brainlessly repeating the propaganda they instilled in you in elementary school.

      What you describe is how it works for reactional users chasing the rush. It is not at all true that your body completely adjusts to low to moderate doses as "the new normal" and you have to increase the dose to get any effect. An interesting exception to the psychiatric taboo against prescribing euphoric drugs is of course in children with ADHD, who are routinely given Ritalin or Adderall (amphetamine, i.e. something that's very very similar to that stuff Walter White was making.)

      These drugs have significant effects that persist even though the dose is held constant. It's also pretty well-established that constant-dose opioids have persistent effects. In both cases, it's primarily those people who want instant gratification, pure recreational euphoria, who are compelled to raise the dose.

      But as a means for treating mental illness, I have to disagree with your implied hypothesis that mental illnesses would often be better treated with recreational drugs that are currently illegal.

      Even if you were correct that euphoric drugs (Just Say No!) lose all potency once the body develops tolerance, this would still be an incorrect conclusion.

      What about illnesses that are episodic, like sporadic panic attacks (these, too, are often treated with spectacularly ineffective SSRIs)? What about regular cases of depression (as opposed to refractory major depressive disorder), which can often resolve over just a couple months?

    54. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      MDMA will not be given for long term, patient-administered treatment. You're lying when you imply otherwise, and you've yet to even try challenging any one of my assertions. The fact that MDMA isn't going to be used for long term or probably even medium term symptom management strongly supports my case, not yours. *Of course* they're willing to touch euphoric drugs,... if they're going to be so locked down as to make abuse or addiction nigh impossible.

      Incidentally, it has a significantly different mode of action than amphetamine and you demonstrate your own profound ignorance when you imply they are closely rated in neurological effects. MDMA has a strong effect on serotonin, which is part and parcel of the pathological serotonin-worshipping cargo cult that developed in the psychiatric community over the past few decades in the aftermath of Prozac's popularity.

    55. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Holy shit you are an intellectually bankrupt liar. Either that or just incredibly lazy to bother doing even the tiniest bit of research for your own arguments. I wasn't going to waste my time, but after 45 seconds the top Google results all confirmed my suspicions: MDMA is for therapy enhancement only. No tolerance will develop, it will only be administered a handful of times with days or weeks in-between, and the patient will not be trusted to take the medicine on his or her own time.

      This is a massive indictment of the psychiatry community and assorted regulatory bodies. It entirely supports my claims whilst undermining yours.

    56. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      by the last paragraph, I merely mean to imply that's probably why they were willing to give MDMA a chance, not that it will necessarily be ineffective.

    57. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't doubt that it is being done, because people are, in general, a bit dim and will try nearly anything, but as someone who's been on SSRIs for a long time I cannot imagine anyone taking them recreationally. They barely take the edge off of my (severe/major) depression.

    58. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Sumus+Semper+Una · · Score: 1

      Congratulations for brainlessly repeating the propaganda they instilled in you in elementary school.

      Or noting my observations of friends in high school and college who developed problems with cocaine and methamphetamines and either upped dosages over time to "cope" or switched to other equally hard drugs of different families once the high became harder to achieve. But yes, it's anecdotal evidence. YMMV.

      What you describe is how it works for reactional users chasing the rush. It is not at all true that your body completely adjusts to low to moderate doses as "the new normal" and you have to increase the dose to get any effect.

      Depends on the substance. E or LSD? Sure. Heroin? Not so much.

      An interesting exception to the psychiatric taboo against prescribing euphoric drugs is of course in children with ADHD, who are routinely given Ritalin or Adderall (amphetamine, i.e. something that's very very similar to that stuff Walter White was making.)

      Good lord man, I mean I know this is Slashdot, but that is one of the most gross oversimplifications of biochemistry I've seen in a long time! Why not revive the bogus "glucose, sucrose, and fructose are the same chemical and are metabolized the same way!" argument all over again while you're at it?

      These drugs have significant effects that persist even though the dose is held constant. It's also pretty well-established that constant-dose opioids have persistent effects. In both cases, it's primarily those people who want instant gratification, pure recreational euphoria, who are compelled to raise the dose.

      Why yes, dosage and exact chemical makeup are important. Designed and administered in a controlled fashion there is much less risk of adverse side effects. Are you suggesting that self-medicating with euphorics would be more beneficial than the current controlled medications prescribed for panic attacks and depression? Personally, I would find a study on the subject fascinating (though unlikely to occur) and would love to read the results. But I really just want to figure out what, exactly, you're suggesting as an alternative to current drug treatment practices.

      Even if you were correct that euphoric drugs (Just Say No!) lose all potency once the body develops tolerance, this would still be an incorrect conclusion.

      What about illnesses that are episodic, like sporadic panic attacks (these, too, are often treated with spectacularly ineffective SSRIs)? What about regular cases of depression (as opposed to refractory major depressive disorder), which can often resolve over just a couple months?

      I was unaware of SSRIs spectacular ineffectiveness in treating panic attacks or depression. I would be interested in details of the trials showing just how spectacularly ineffective they are. I am, however, aware of a concerns that began within the last couple of years that seemed to show that unpublished clinical trials showed SSRIs to be no more effective than placebos. I felt that the issue was most effectively explained in this article in Molecular Psychology: http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v21/n4/pdf/mp201553a.pdf. In short, aggregating loosely related symptoms into an overall score instead of focusing specifically on anxiety or depression does indeed make SSRIs look little better than placebos. But if you look at their effectiveness on those areas specifically, they show extremely consistent improvement.

      If you're going to nitpick on the outliers, then what about severe depression that does not resolve over just a couple of months and leads to suicide? Is it better to err on the side of overprescription that may buy someone time for treatment through cognitive behavioral therapy to save their life and/or help them put their life back together or is it better to err on the side of not prescribing until you're absolutely sure other options haven't worked and run the risk of the person's life becoming steadily worse or ending altogether?

    59. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Or noting my observations of friends in high school and college who developed problems with cocaine and methamphetamines and either upped dosages over time to "cope" or switched to other equally hard drugs of different families once the high became harder to achieve. But yes, it's anecdotal evidence. YMMV.

      Were they taking it for productivity, recreationally, or to cope with specific feelings? You just said "high", which implies a strong recreational (or at least meditative/psychonaut-y) element.

      Depends on the substance. E or LSD? Sure. Heroin? Not so much.

      Heroin absolutely will provide long term antidepressant (as well as analgesic) effects at a constant dosage. You don't have to inject it, you know. It's just that most people willing to go through the effort to get their hands on a large (or at least regular) supply of H aren't in it to be conservative; they're in it to chase the rush.

      But that's a product of heroin's illegality and (relative to other opioids) ease of production. Don't screw up your causation chain here.

      I would be interested in details of the trials showing just how spectacularly ineffective they are.

      Check out Prozac's wikipedia page for some sourced stuff. Prozac was what launched the SSRI "revolution", was one of the most popularly prescribed medicines of all time, is on WHO's essential drug list and is still widely prescribed by physicians who subjectively believe it to be effective based on their own highly biased experience.

      Here are the ballpark numbers for Prozac (adjusted for placebo): 2/3 OCD sufferers were not much improved, 4/5 anxiety disorder sufferers did not see control of their panic attacks, and after a 2008 meta-analysis of all the major studies, it appeared that the efficacy of Prozac for mild or moderate depression was insignificant. As in, the effect was so small they can't be sure it helped anyone. (Its efficacy for major depression is also insignificant. Almost no drug will put a dent in major depression short of powerful euphorics.)

      Some other SSRIs fare a bit better, but frankly I don't trust those numbers. It took decades for Prozac's ineffectiveness to come to light, and 8 years after the news broke it's STILL approved to treat depression and it's STILL on WHO's essential medicines list despite not being a good treatment for *anything* except maybe as a third or fourth line Hail Mary option. I haven't had time to go digging through how drug trials work, but the whole thing stinks to high heaven. (At a minimum, I strongly suspect they are suppressing negative studies and basically just rolling the dice until they get lucky.)

      But all that aside, even the more effective SSRIs do not adequately resolve depression or anxiety for most of the people taking them. Because of this, psychiatrists are now frequently recommending stuff like atypical antipsychotics (which have significant physiological and psychological side effects) or mood stabilizers as an adjunct.

      I am, however, aware of a concerns that began within the last couple of years that seemed to show that unpublished clinical trials showed SSRIs to be no more effective than placebos.

      Oh, I didn't see this bit when I wrote the above. Yeah, except it's been over 8 years since they had compelling evidence, and they've done absolutely nothing. Prozac and other SSRIs have been HUGE business; I mean it was completely revolutionary.

      And it dovetailed *so* nicely with all of their anti-addiction / anti-abuse rhetoric. The psychiatric industry wanted a placebo desperately, even moreso than their poor suffering patients, and eight years later they're too gutless and self-serving to even admit to their patients that there's a problem.

      Contrast this to any other medical disorder you could think of: if the FIRST LINE TREATMENT your doctor told you to take had a 80% ch

    60. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by cheetah_spottycat · · Score: 1

      A lot of medication takes up to three weeks to show any effect, and sudden changes in dosage can wreak havoc on your neurochemistry, and possibly make things much, much worse. Also, in case of clinical depression for example, you want to prevent the next episode. When it's already there (and that come very quickly), and you're already standing on the bridge ready to jump, so to speak, it's unlikely you're going to be motivated to take your medicine. There's a joke that goes, "There's that new book "The power of positive thinking". I didn't buy it, because what would that be good for.". That sounds funny, but captures a depressive mindset rather well.

    61. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      That's backwards thinking, justification-after-the-fact. The real reason for continuous treatment is that's the only chance the SSRIs / SNRIs have of making even the slightest dent in anixety disorders (or other episodic disorders.) For anxiety specifically, benzos / nonbenzos work instantly, powerfully and on-demand, and if properly tapered off certainly do not "wreck havoc on your neurochemistry".

    62. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Almost forgot: the other major reason for continuous treatment is to bolster the lie that SSRIs/SNRIs/Tricyclics/MAOIs/etc work by "correcting a neurotransmitter imbalance", i.e. by making your brain normal again. All of the tools we have at our disposal are ugly hacks, including SSRIs, but they really don't want to admit that. The FDA even allowed Zoloft (as I recall) to put out commercials basically advertising that it made you normal again.

    63. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      You once again prove you don't know what you're talking about. Claiming a 20% success rate is grounds for a malpractice suit is really, really stupid. It's also not based in reality. According to your way of thinking, we should also abandon CPR in hospitals because the survival rate is less than 20%. And it gets worse outside hospitals.

      Of course MDMA was being used in therapists offices and not for daily use. The idea is to get the patient into a mental state where they can FIX their problems with help, not keep them in an altered state of mind for the rest of their lives. I've already stated as much elsewhere. But of course you really don't want to fix the problem, because that would go against your narrative, that everybody must get stoned. Good song, shitty day-to-day lifestyle.

      I NEVER said Prozac was useful for anything, so why do you keep bringing it up? Are you delusional?

      I'll repeat myself - major depressive disorder has many causes, and many comorbid conditions. There will NEVER be a one-size-fits-all solution. So 10% here, 5% there, 20% elsewhere, it's the best we can expect. Anything else is fantasy.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    64. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      I NEVER implied that MDMA wa going to be used for ling term patient-administered treatment. You are SO full of shit - adjust your dose of sertraline - you're letting your delusions interfere with reality, fucktard. I also never said that they had the same neurological effects, stupid.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    65. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      And again, fucktard completely misses the fact that I NEVER said it was for long-term use, and the article I linked to (which you obviously never read) made it clear that it was only used a an adjunct to therapy to help patients get into a state where they could actually see that there was hope.

      Look, you're obviously brain-fried. Get some help. Real help. Of course you won't because you don't see you have a problem.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    66. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Also, I don't know what sort of 3rd world shithole you're living in to say this:

      No it isn't. It particularly isn't given the massive costs involved in getting a script (which people are paying for either directly or indirectly)

      Here, there is no cost for seeing a doctor, no cost for being referred to a psychiatrist, no cost for therapy sessions. If your income level is below a certain amount, drugs are free (especially helpful for seniors). Everyone else who doesn't have a private plan pays abut $1k a year from their taxes into a pot to cover all the public drug plan expenses

      It's also against the law for doctors and pharmacists to take any form of kickback, gratuity, gift, trips, cash cards, paid-for conferences, etc. Recently a few pharmacists "forgot", and ended up being audited. Nobody wants to be audited, even if you've done nothing wrong, so there's a strong disincentive to corrupt practices, especially when it could see you losing your professional license.

      This is why when you see a psychiatrist, they only offer to try out meds if you want to, after discussing the pros and cons, and their goal is the least amount for the shortest time that will have the desired effect while they and your therapist try to get to the root of the problem. The exceptions are things like bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, which need medicinal control permanently, since there is no curing them any more than you can cure type 1 diabetes and get off insulin.

      You're probably seeing things through the lens of your country's for profit private medical system, which incentivizes pushing drugs by not outlawing pharmaceutical companies making kickbacks to pharmacists and doctors based on how many scrips are written and filled for their brand of drug. You want to fix the problem - attack the source - your health care system with its perverse incentives.

      Not everyone lives in whatever private for-profit health fuckistan you live in that puts profit over people, so obviously your experiences will be different, and your outcomes will be different. But most of the more advanced countries don't work that way.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    67. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Also, I don't know what sort of 3rd world shithole you're living in to say this:

      Poor in America. You have any idea how huge and expensive a hassle it is to find a doctor who offers a reasonable uninsured rate ($50 was nice but most are around $80 now), a ride there and to the pharmacy and then have to pay for the drugs? And if you're working, losing money for the time it takes to go to the doctor's office? Larger cities sometimes have free clinics, which are like one or days a month and are hellish.

      It's a bit better under Obamacare insurance, except the doctors themselves are abysmally bad and suspicious of their patients.

      Here, there is no cost for seeing a doctor, no cost for being referred to a psychiatrist, no cost for therapy sessions.

      Fucking good for you. Is your country actually accepting post-Trump American refugees?

      You're probably seeing things through the lens of your country's for profit private medical system

      I suspect the efficacy of SSRIs is not dependent on latitude and longitude. Forgive my American chauvinism, but I also suspect that practices and popular medicines are often based on ours since we're a world leader in healthcare study and innovation (just not its practice.)

      In fact, I strongly suspect quite the opposite: free access to healthcare probably greatly increases the appetite for placebos. Witness the clusterfuck of alternative medicine being paid for by the NHS, for example (or did they finally stop that shit?) The longer you spend tinkering around, the more time there is for a coincidence to suddenly convince you that you've stumbled on something that really works. Which isn't to say I'm for more restrictive healthcare but surely, you can't possibly expect me to believe that with all of the quackery Britain and much of the continent tolerates that they're somehow better judges of real medicine.

      I'm less familiar with the Commonwealth but I suspect Canada and Australia aren't too dissimilar.

    68. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Claiming a 20% success rate is grounds for a malpractice suit is really, really stupid.

      When benzos (probably; I'm not looking this up right now) have a 70%+ rate? And not telling the patient that actual effective treatments exist? Yes, that's malpractice.

      Now, if the patient is informed of all of the choices and doesn't want to risk the side effects of benzos and decides to see if they're one of the lucky 1 in 5, sure. They should have that option.

      Claiming a 20% success rate is grounds for a malpractice suit is really, really stupid.

      Do try and keep up. My entire overarching thesis from the beginning is that effective drugs DO exist, but it's so much easier for them to keep prescribing placebos and marginally effective drugs to potentially suicidal people without even telling them that these drugs are abysmally ineffective.

      I NEVER said Prozac was useful for anything, so why do you keep bringing it up? Are you delusional?

      Prozac is the cornerstone of modern psychiatry. It was the first SSRI widely prescribed. Millions of people were given placebos, and eight years after they were shown to be placebos doctors are STILL doing it and there's been no effort to my knowledge to aggressively conduct after-market studies on the other SSRIs and SNRIs. Defending modern antidepressants as you appear to be doing is defending this whole charade.

      Again, my overarching thesis is that psychiatrists are addicted (a word I choose advisedly) to prescribing placebos. If they have to admit that the current drugs suck *and* that there are drugs that actually do work but they're all controlled... that's a shitstorm of the highest magnitude. No one will accept it. It's in no one's interest to tell the truth about these things... except the patients, but they have an entire society brainwashing them that any drug that actually clearly and reliably makes people happier is by definition bad.

      But of course you really don't want to fix the problem, because that would go against your narrative, that everybody must get stoned

      "A gramme is always better than a damn".

      That is my best retort all month but I'm going to spoil it with an explanation: you're brainlessly regurgitating propaganda. Opioids and amphetamines don't impair you any more than an Welbutrin would... You just have to compare the doses fairly (after all, one isn't terribly effective if one is having a mild seizure.)

      Using the word "high" means you don't have a goddamn clue. It's a function of dose first and foremost, but also activity. If it's a mild-moderate dose and you're taking it in the context of functioning in your daily life, you don't perceive it as getting high. That's a social construct, that.

      You might be tempted to substitute some other word for "high, but here's the fact of the matter: We have drugs that can severely impair thinking that are approved to treat depression (atypical antipsychotics), and we have drugs that can markedly improve thinking (amphetamines) that are evil, evil drugs that only bad people use.

      Try as you might to differentiate the 'good' drugs from the 'bad', you will always, ALWAYS come back to the inescapable fact that the 'bad' drugs are so deemed because they are very effective. (And also because they tend to work fast and don't have an upper dose limit that prevents an "abuser" from obtaining high levels of euphoria.)

      At least, that's the conclusion you'll inexorably meet if you're intellectually honest about it.

    69. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      You are SO full of shit - adjust your dose of sertraline - you're letting your delusions interfere with reality, fucktard. I also never said that they had the same neurological effects, stupid.

      Me:

      MDMA for PTSD isn't *quite* the same thing as opioids or amphetamines for depression or anxiety.

      You:

      What do you think MDMA stands for? It's a stimulant with a chemical structure closely related to metamphetamine and mescaline.

      I'll let posterity decide who is full of shit and/or delusional here.

    70. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      White noise. You've descended to sophistry, ignoring the point of this entire tangent and even ignoring your previous attempts to pretend that the main/only topic of conversation here was Major Depressive Disorder, which obviously would be extremely ill-suited this sort of sporadic short term therapy.

      You brought MDMA up as a counterexample to disprove my assertion that the psychiatric establishment's pathologization of addiction has made them ignore effective drugs in lieu of extremely ineffective drugs and some outright placebos. And it is obviously that same pathologization of addiction that leads them to insist that the patients are not to be trusted to take the MDMA home with them, and there's no mention of an attempt to use MDMA or any other euphoria-producing drug to treat chronic disorders or treat episodic disorders.

      You're either too lazy to follow your own arguments, a moron, or you never had any intention of being intellectually honest.

    71. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, you said "stoned", not "high". My subconscious was being generous to you there. "Stoned" is of course an even pejorative than "high".

    72. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      *even bigger. I'm not proofreading shit for your sake so maybe this third correction will have a typo too

    73. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Like I said - some 3rd world shit-hole. No universal health care (even Cuba is better than that). And while we are accepting refugees for Syria, we aren't from America. You have the vote, you can change things, that you don't is an indictment of Americans for the last 40 years. You got the government you deserve from Reagan on.

      Other countries do their own studies, and often find flaws. Two examples - the Women's Health Initiative, which was supposed to be the "gold standard" with the "largest number of test subjects properly selected yada yada yada", and which was stopped prematurely because of claims of high rates of stroke among women taking estrogens (which caused millions of women to stop taking them and end up on antidepressants). The cohort selected was far from representative, subsequent re-evaluation of the data plus studies done by other countries found it was full of shit, and that the overall death rate was lower, not higher. And they didn't use human estrogen - they used horse hormones, which are not identical, with more than 50 unknown components, and was approved back when the FDA only wanted the active ingredients tested (turns out it causes liver damage).

      Second example - olmesartin, sold under the brand name Benicar in the US, turns out that studies by other countries found a high risk of death for diabetics as well as suicidal ideation that the studies the FDA used for approval didn't find.

      There are more - these are just 2 off the top of my head. They are both still being sold under the original approvals in the US, even though the FDA has admitted they don't know what is in Premarin and Prempro.

      Other countries don't depend of FDA studies any more than the US depends on other countries studies.

      As for alternate "medicines", they aren't covered here, and, unlike the US, all homeopathic "medicines" will be required to state on the box that the claims have not been scientifically proven, same as it's already illegal to stock homeopathic products that claim they can treat cold, cough, flu, etc., in children under 12 unless accompanied by appropriate studies proving the claims - and homeopaths can't because bullshit is the only active ingredient, and they're not going to pay for all the trials necessary.

      One day the brits will catch up, because economic necessity will force them to get rid of the quackery despite politicians wanting to be as liberal as possible and allow anything and everything so as not to piss of their voters.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    74. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      You still don't get it. The choice is between a short course of anti-depressants, of a lifetime on amphetamines, most people will take the shorter course of drugs. Many drugs have side effects, so the idea is to take them for the least amount of time necessary. The drugs are NOT supposed to make the patient happy. That would introduce to much of a risk of addiction, as we saw with Oxycontin, which was supposed to be addiction-proof.

      If somebody is on antidepressants for life, their doctor is doing it wrong. Other countries don't do this - this is a US-specific phenomena. But with the focus on for-profit medicine, it's easier, quicker, and cheaper in the short run to keep the patient on drugs rather than try to fix the underlying problem. That it works out more expensive in the long run is irrelevant to both the drug industry and the government.

      It is up to patients in such situations to ask for alternatives, same as it is for patients to always gather enough information to make informed choices. Nowadays there's no excuse not to go to the local library and do some research on the internet if you can't do it on your phone or at home.

      Also, CBT (Cognitive-Based Therapy) has an extremely high rate of success when used in conjunction with anti-anxiety drugs to help the patient learn to control PTSD. It's the treatment of choice. Even when it doesn't result in complete remission, it helps, and along with things like emotional support animals, it leads to improvements in life, which is the goal. If someone can function without drugs after a certain point, that's a far better win than giving them amphetamines or antidepressants for life.

      You are too focused on quick relief of symptoms, not on what is in the best long-term benefit of the patient.

      Also, here we don't use antipsychotics to treat depression. If your country does, the people making the decisions need to either change their meds or get help. Depression, even chronic major depressive disorder, is not a psychosis. It's not the same as schizophrenia, where the person is sometimes living in an alternate reality. Studies have shown that depressed people actually make more realistic judges of outcomes of situations, perhaps because normal people are unrealistic in their expectations. That's why you get ponzi schemes like Twitter. Contrary to claims that Twitter has enough money at its current burn rate to last 420 years, it only has enough to last 3 - the 420 figure was based on insane stock evaluations. Twitter isn't just not worth less than $10. It's worth less than $2 if it were liquidated today, and at current rates, cash on hand will drop to zero within 2 years, and their other "assets" aren't worth anything.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    75. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Learn to read. Having a similar chemical structure means it has similar effects. It gets people high. People make bad judgments - sleeping with people they never would have if they weren't caught up in feeling good. Getting so addicted to "the scene" that they lose their spouse and their business (seen it happen) It also can cause anxiety and depression. Having to take ANY drug forever is not a long-term solution for ptsd or depression. Masking a problem doesn't solve it.

      And while we're at it - you are a huge liar. You posted saying that you were done on this topic, but you keep coming back. Can't even keep your word, can you?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    76. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      You're the one who thinks it's okay to use amphetamines, self administered, long-term to "fix" the problem. Without ANY proof of efficacy. Zero. Your "feelings" are not proof. If you believe otherwise. you're psychotic, because you're obviously not living in a world where opinion and belief matters more than facts. Must be the post-fact USA.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    77. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Having a similar chemical structure means it has similar effects.

      Ah, so you're reversing your previous post now and you *are* arguing that the effect of MDMA is similar to amphetamines? Which is it?

      people make bad judgments - sleeping with people they never would have if they weren't caught up in feeling good.

      Amphetamines lead to people making objectively good judgments all the time. They enhance mental acuity and reaction time. This has been repeatedly scientifically proven, and amphetamine is prescribed to children in the form of Adderall. Bad judgment is a function of dose. If you fry your brain on them yes, your ability to make decisions will be compromised. I suspect if you down 50 SSRIs (never mind atypical antipsychotics) your brain, including judgment centers, won't be firing at 100%.

      And while we're at it - you are a huge liar.

      I changed my mind because you were acting especially annoying. I'll leave it to posterity: if someone says "I'm leaving now; sick of arguing" and they stick around for 10 more minutes because the asshole they're talking to is flailing around so wildly they can't resist, is that person a "huge liar"? A mere "bigly" liar, maybe?

    78. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1
      Freedom is the ability to say two plus two equals four. Amphetamines are already administered to MILLIONS of kids, with tons of safety studies to back it up. It works on the same receptors as Wellbutrin, a drug you appear to champion, but more effectively and with greater euphoria (yes, even at low doses.) There is no reason to suspect it wouldn't work. Such sentences are not unscientific to utter. Indeed, science would grind to a halt if sentences like that were verboten. I never, ever claimed that such studies have been done already, merely that they should be done.

      You're the one who thinks it's okay to use amphetamines, self administered, long-term to "fix" the problem.

      You are being intellectually dishonest. I repeatedly acknowledged the danger to people with bad impulse control or who have an unhealthy fixation on the state of extreme euphoria.

    79. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Also, here we don't use antipsychotics to treat depression.

      Wrong.

      (Assuming you're Canadian based on the spelling.)

      You still don't get it. The choice is between a short course of anti-depressants, of a lifetime on amphetamines, most people will take the shorter course of drugs.

      What nonsense is this? They routinely recommend you stay on anti-depressants for over a year "just to make sure", and if you have any recurrence at all they are happy to prescribe them for life.

      Euphorics like amphetamines or opioids could be taken sporadically and symptomatically *or* they could be taken daily. The potential for shorter term treatment is obviously much higher with them than with these low-efficacy things that you supposedly have to take for three weeks to feel anything at all.

      . If somebody is on antidepressants for life, their doctor is doing it wrong.

      Citation needed. What are the treatment guidelines for refractory or recurrent depression in your neck of the woods? Given that most people don't ever adequately respond to the drugs (adjusted for the ones who would've gone better on their own anyway), what do you guys do? Just cut them off and give them nothing?

      You are too focused on quick relief of symptoms, not on what is in the best long-term benefit of the patient.

      It's both. There's no reason at all to suspect that Welbutrin, by messing around with dopamine and noradrenaline, is somehow more genuine of an antidepressant than amphetamines, which also mess around with dopamine and noradrenaline. It's just that their culture strongly discourages them from closely studying the latter (though some studies do exist, e.g. depression among kids with ADHD who've taken Adderall.)

      The drugs are NOT supposed to make the patient happy.

      Yes they are. Or "let them be happy" if you want to be pedantic. A mild to moderate dose of opioids or amphetamines cause previously dull and depressing activities, in a sufferer of MDD, to become joyful again. The positive feedback of accomplishment suddenly returns. This is exactly what SSRIs/SNRIs are alleged to do, but don't (for most people.)

      Opioid euphoria could mean staring at the ceiling doing nothing, sure. And by the same token, Wellbutrin could mean flopping on the floor having a seizure.

    80. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Beat you to it - moved to Soylent News. My original account user id was in the 40,000s. The neighborhood has really gone downhill in the last decade. Your shitposting of mental diarrhea about how your opinions count for more than studies is typical of the libtards, SJWs, and alt-left, alt-right and conspiracy nutbars. It's worse than Facebook, and that's bad enough.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    81. Re:Don't forget about the War on Drugs. by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      Don't worry hun, you're not the first person to be allergic to facts or reason. You might not have noticed until now due to your above average tenacity.

  30. Re:Really? by hackwrench · · Score: 2

    Really? How were the questions phrased. They ask me about depression, but they are hardly phrased in a way that would make be believe they are trying to convince me I am depressed.

  31. ‘Anti-depressants almost always useless & by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Almost a million people in the Netherlands use anti-depressants even though they shouldn't, according to Dick Bijl, epidemiologist and chief editor of the Geneesmiddelenbulletin.
    Just over a million in the country use anti-depressants, but for 98% they're ineffective, he says based on multiple studies. A lot of people get addicted and experience side-effects, such as suicidal tendencies, emotional dulling and character changes.
    Source (It goes on to say that the drugs are often prescribed to people who aren't really depressed and that drugs against depression, psychosis and ADHD are over-prescribed. The Dutch GP association states they may have underestimated the issue and that they're working on it.)

  32. I get all my medical advice from bloggers by JoeyRox · · Score: 1

    And my financial advice from vines.

    1. Re:I get all my medical advice from bloggers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Crowdsourced medicine for the win!

      Personally I have watched 6 hours of educational lectures every day for the past 3 months, on subjects ranging from philosophy to cryptography to pop culture. That amounts to 540 hours of free education. Tomorrow I am printing out my diploma.

  33. The World Would Be Infinitely Better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If all psychiatrists had their faces removed with the claw end of a hammer.

  34. Series of tubes by sjukfan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know when a non techie talk about the Internet as a series of tubes? This is one of those times but about psychiatric meds.

    First off, of course it's wrong if you take meds so you can handle the stress of two full time jobs or assume you can just take a couple of pills and your depression will be gone.

    But for most people out there with a psychiatric condition meds and therapy (and some more therapy) is a life saver. The meds will remove some of the symptoms so you can live an almost normal life while therapy helps with the cause for them. A depression is nothing like feeling a bit under the weather, a panic disorder does not go away with a gluten free diet, and grave OCD is as easy to just hold in as Ipecac

    1. Re:Series of tubes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is medical insurance companies and so-called 'health maintenance organizations' don't want to pay for expensive and lengthy cognitive therapy. Add to this that we live in a society where if you're not happy, happy, happy ALL THE TIME then you're frowned upon as some sort of rude person; how dare you be upset or unhappy about anything at all, don't you have any regard whatsoever for everyone else? There MUST be something wrong with you! So you go to the doctor, because the pharma-medical-industrial complex has everyone convinced that being unhappy for any reason (even justifiable ones) is an illness that must be treated. But rather than teaching people that (1) it's OK to be justifiably unhappy sometimes, and (2) you learn to deal with your problems, not run from them (by taking drugs), they prescribe you a 'happy pill', pat you on the back, tell you "there, there, you'll feel FINE in a short while!" and send you on your way. WRONG! People used to learn that life is tough sometimes and that tough people persevere and learn to deal with things. Not so much anymore, apparently.

      Do some people have a legitimate chemical imbalance that means they just can't get through life without some actual chemical help to keep them balanced? Yes. Is that as large a percentage of the population as it seems to be right now? Hell, no. Most people just need to learn to deal with their problems cognitively and by talking through things with the people in their lives that are supposed to be there to be supportive of them.

    2. Re:Series of tubes by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      You know when a non techie talk about the Internet as a series of tubes? This is one of those times but about psychiatric meds.

      It's worse than that.

      "American Mental health is deteriorating" + "We prescribe more psychiatric drugs" = "the drugs are the cause of mental health deterioration!"

      As if nothing else has changed.

      Maybe the change in tone of the news? The move to clickbate bullshit, alarmist headlines, and fear mongering to get people to come running back to lick the media mouthpieces's hands in hopes they'll warn them about more danger? The increased polarization of American politics? The election of a pedophile who wants to bang his daughter to the presidency based entirely on false economic claims, while all of the opponents in the election had no fucking clue how economics works, either?

      We live in a world that puts an assload of stress on people now. We've got a much-better economic position than 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 40 years ago... yet people believe they're more-threatened and less-stable. They fear for their safety. Do you think this won't generate mass-hysteria and serious psychiatric pathology?

  35. Re:The problem by diesalesmandie · · Score: 1

    The problem is that we don't know when a few sessions of therapy or a change in life circumstances would suffice, yet we are so quick to claim they would.

    Of course we don't know but they at least have to be tried before we start throwing medication at people.

    --
    This is my sig, there are many like it but this one is mine
  36. Re:Don't be fooled by the words "Scientific Americ by Phics · · Score: 2

    Psychiatric medicine seems to rely on a lot of trial and error, to see what works and what doesn't. The problem compounds as soon as multiple medications are used. Differences in physiology and the nature of the disorder, including factors such as incorrect or incomplete diagnosis seem to lead some unfortunates down the wrong paths, where the presumed illness is incorrectly treated. For example, some personality disorders, such as BPD, can't be effectively treated with medication at all, and must be tackled therapeutically instead, but are often misdiagnosed as something else, or, are sometimes only recognized as anxiety or depression, and while some SSRIs can help with that component, the bigger underlying diagnosis isn't recognized.

    In short, treating mental illness can really only be done on an individual basis, and not every psychologist or psychiatrist is going to get it right, and more often than not, many mental illnesses are not treated correctly from day one. To some degree this is to be expected, but it also results in many people seeing nothing but confusion when looking at treatments which are in place. It takes time to get to know someone's mind, so it's no wonder that years can pass before even skilled doctors are able to make a positive impact on many mentally ill patients. It's also no wonder that many of these patients fall through the cracks in the mean-time. Not everyone can afford the kind of treatment required by some diereses, and the waiting game can be frustrating to even well adjusted people.

    All I'm saying is that there are many problems which lead to GPs continuously prescribing a regimen of ineffectual drugs, without even thinking about issues such as poor education or practices, or the various evils, (imagined or otherwise), of pharmaceutical companies. To be clear, it's not the drugs that are the problem. The drugs actually do help in many cases. It's getting to that point where they do help that is the trick.

    --
    There are two types of people in the world; those who believe there are two types of people, and those who don't.
  37. You can complain and bash big pharma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you explain why so many people voluntarily take, and pay for, drugs that are not doing them any good.

  38. Diagnostic / debugging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fluoxetine is a mood-diode. It prevents negative excursions.

    Try it if you suffer.

    Harmless otherwise.

    1. Re:Diagnostic / debugging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  39. For what it's worth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BiPolar type one rapid cycler here. Never self medicated (EG: alcohol, non-script drugs). With meds I was sleeping 18hrs a day, unable to do my job, lethargic, weight gains, poor appetite, shitty immune system, and mentally DOA. Headaches all the time. A loss in insurance made it nearly impossible to continue the meds. A late onset food allergy ended my addiction to chocolate. Weight is back to normal (mostly, could lose another 5kg). Sleep MY personal norm of 4-5hrs a night, wake feeling good. Produce as much work as I did at 18. Enjoy many other hobbies. Etc. Sure, the depression sucks. And I'm looking into LSD as a means to manage. But the pharma drugs, done with; they SUCK. I meticulously watch my food and have found trigger combos and avoid them. Found trigger behaviours and avoid them. Found that the industry of medicine assumes a course and follows it, no matter what the patient says in contrast. Sure, the way I deal with it now is a great deal of time and behaviour management but it works far better than anything they dosed me with. The fact is, they didn't want to put in the work and did not want teach me that I didn't need them. I got lucky that I was forced onto this path. I'd never go back. No, it's not a panacea for everyone. But, just like a drug combo is unique per person, this solution works very well for me.

  40. Re:Don't be fooled by the words "Scientific Americ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Psychiatric medicine seems to rely on a lot of trial and error, to see what works and what doesn't.

    So does all of science.

  41. What did anyone expect? by Miamicoastguard · · Score: 0

    How does treating 'problems' diagnosed with pseudoscience with acute medicine not sound like a recipe for disaster? Until they start from the ground up and build a framework based upon actual neurological phenomena, the whole thing is a house of cards propped up with FUD perpetuated to keep their fraudulent profession employed.

  42. Re:The problem by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    One of the reasons to prescribe medication is to get the person to a state where they are not overwhelmed by their problems, are open to therapy, and can look at their problems in a different way with outside help.

    A person who can't sleep, can't work, can't concentrate because they are in a serious depression and they have continuous intrusive thoughts of suicide, and you want them to learn enough cognitive behavioral therapy so they can work out how their thinking is distorted before resorting to medication? Therapy takes a few months - what do they do in the meantime? Kill themselves? Someone in a crisis doesn't have the luxury of taking months and months of therapy once a week. And they would be too distracted by their illness to benefit from it.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  43. Re:No, no no! Your doc needs his swimming pool! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

    You probably think that there are carburetors that allow a 4000 pound car to get 100 miles per gallon but don't appear on the market because the gas companies hid the research.

    Time to up your meds.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  44. Is that you? by meglon · · Score: 1

    It's rare these days that Tom Cruise doesn't get a listing in the credits..... except on /. apparently.

    --
    Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
  45. false diagnosis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When M.D.s falsely diagnose a disturbing amount of people, it's no wonder these drugs can do harm. This, to me, means we are asking the wrong question. It's *not* are these drugs harming more patients than helping? It's rather, are we giving these drugs to people who don't need them?

  46. Strong relationship bonds for good mental health by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As reported by Sue Johnson in her Book Love Sense, current research is conclusive that strong human relationship bonds is the strongest single predictor to good health. And we can shape our relationships by learning how to open up and respond to each other. I'm not an expert on the subject but I strongly recommend this book as it also describes an couple therapy method called EFT which seems to have an unusually high success rate.

  47. What is the ? scientology advertising ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yes psychiatric drug help. There are peer review on it, and plenty of people staving off depression, schizophrenia, and various other problems with their help. Do you rhink those people would be better off with depression ? If so , as someboy which was sucessfully treated for depression and does not take anymore medications : fuck you. This type of bullshit i expect from a scientology outfit "all psychiatry is abd" or from a gutter toilet paper of a journal like daily fail.

  48. Re:I am a single by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    I am a single person who says otherwise.

    I had mild depression and bad OCD and other issues like fatigue or rather narcolepsy. After a bad breakup with an exgf and stuck in a job I was not too found of a doctor prescribed me Celexia or Citaprolom.

    My genitals became numb within 72 hours. I was told it takes a few weeks don't worry side effects. So I continued. I became forgetful at work and couldn't remember simple things. I started drinking and spending thousands on my credit card. I quit excersizing and developed heart issues.

    Worse my sex drive completely vanished. I mean months after taking it! Zero interest in sex now!! Gone. I became also boderline trans and started having bad gender dysphoria after month 3. That scared the shit out of me and I wanted to stop asap. But that is where the fun just started. :-)

    Quiting an SSRI is like quiting crack or alcohol. My brain was so dependent on it that I needed the drug to function. I was turning into someone I did not recognize but had to stay on it and taper slowly.
    It took 3 weeks to taper off and I had nightmares, brain zaps, sickness, paranoia, and missed work and almost got fired. Going off it brought major depression as my mind had so little serotonin receptors left thanks to the SSRI that it couldn't function right.

    Here I am 3 months later still with no sex drive or sexuality left, thousands in credit card debt, and depression which wasn't that bad before and who knows if I will ever get it back. Thankfully my gender dysphoria went away after staying off. I still have bursts of it which were never present before taking the medication. That was not me. This stuff changes you

  49. Re:Don't be fooled by the words "Scientific Americ by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    Um doctors get their information from drug salesmen. There are psychiatrists who do not like SSRIs as no one really knows for sure how they work.

  50. Yup, fake news again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everything about the headline and summary screams fake news.

  51. Indiscriminate handing out of meds causing serious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Suicide survivor here. Doctors have become irresponsible shills for large corporations and there is no voice of reason. Until there is oversight and reprimanding of dealer-docs this problem will continue to explode. The answer for every problem has become a pill. Hippocrates is rolling in his grave.

  52. Who can tell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But I am often depressed and I take SAM-e over the counter and it helps. No one needs to know.

  53. Re: Indiscriminate handing out of meds causing ser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Suicide survivor? I think not.

  54. worked for me the first time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i was on them and they, along with other treatments, changed my outlook. i stopped, and have tried them again but the last times for shorter duration and little to no impact. may even have hurt, moderation works now. just get less than white girl wasted once a week or less.

  55. Nature of work is changing. by Tablizer · · Score: 0

    The nature of work is changing; that's possibly why disability claims for mental disorders are going up. In the old days most simply put widgets into wadgets all day. Although boring, it's rather straight forward and predictable. Now more have to deal with office politics, which can get ugly, personal, and stressful.

  56. Re:No, no no! Your doc needs his swimming pool! by gtall · · Score: 1

    BS. When you go to a doctor and s/he prescribes some magic ointment to clear up a rash, but it does work, do you automatically assume s/he pulling a scam to get you to come back in?

  57. The ignorance is strong with this one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Nobody really understands how anti-depressant meds work. Oh they can prove THAT they work easily enough, that's cause and effect, easily documented and established. But nobody really understands HOW or WHY they work.

    One of the things you're overlooking is the part where it can take weeks of taking the meds every day with no effect, and then one day, suddenly, WOW! It kicks in.

    There's another experiment that seems unrelated at first but bear with me here... You wear glasses that turn the world upside down. For several days you stagger around, trying to live in an upside down world. Then, after a few days, your mind adapts and suddenly everything is normal again. Now you take the glasses off, only to find the regular world seems upside down. It takes another few days to adapt back.

    It's kind of like that with these meds. We know they affect neurotransmitter levels in the synaptic gap. And we know that somehow, after several weeks, this will have an effect on depression. But beyond that... It's magic. Somehow the mind is adapting to the new levels of neurotransmitters. But it takes weeks to have an effect.

    As for addiction: Look at the withdrawal effects of alcohol. Delirium tremors? That's nasty! These anti-depressants? It's not like you can take twice as much and get a better high. It just pushes you up to normal.

    Two more fun points for you: Depression usually goes away on its own after 6 months. Nobody knows why. So the real goal is to keep folks from suffering, and killing themselves, until the mind repairs itself. Or to enable folks to talk it out in therapy to understand how they've gotten their life in such a rut. The great evil of depression is that folks who have it can't seek help. They just don't have the motivation or energy. It's a trap! The meds let you get help and overcome it.

    Second point: Depression is trivially caused -- created -- by poor sleep habits. Insufficient sleep, staying up too late, getting up too early. This is how you create depression in the lab to test new drugs. Mix this with our work habits, working 10, 12, 14, sometimes 16 or more hours a day for weeks/months/years at a time, both parents working multiple jobs while trying to raise kids, being on call 24x7x365, etc.

    We live in a society that manufactures depression as a side effect of corporate greed.

    1. Re:The ignorance is strong with this one... by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      One of the things you're overlooking is the part where it can take weeks of taking the meds every day with no effect, and then one day, suddenly, WOW! It kicks in.

      There is no wow for the majority of people who take SSRIs. I'm "overlooking" nothing. I'm not arguing for giving SSRIs episodically. It's about other ("abusable") drugs episodically vs. SSRIs (and SNRIs, atypical antipsychotics, etc.) daily. For anxiety conditions and some other mood conditions, too.

      and we know that somehow, after several weeks, this will have an effect on depression.

      Except we know they don't satisfactorily treat or cure depression for the majority of people taking them, and they perform particularly badly in the more severe or prolonged cases of depression.

      Depression is trivially caused

      By psychiatrist-apologists spouting bullshit. At least in my case.

    2. Re:The ignorance is strong with this one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no wow for the majority of people who take SSRIs.

      There can be. Many years ago, my sister was dealing with severe depression, to the point of having tried to kill herself several times. For one attempt, she took the entire bottle of Prozac that she'd been prescribed, not knowing how difficult it is to OD on it. She told us about it some days later, and remarked that it had pissed her off because the day after the attempt was the best she'd felt in years.

      The main problem is that we still don't really have a good handle on what causes depression, and how to fix it. My own experience has been that SSRIs and the like are not particularly helpful for depression. In line with some of what you've been saying, the last time I truly felt good was when I took one of my wife's oxycodone pills for some really bad arthritis pain. About half an hour later, something clicked and I instantly felt better than I had anytime in the past 20 years or so. Problem is, the effect only lasted about 10 minutes, and then things went right back to the way they were.

    3. Re:The ignorance is strong with this one... by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1

      This may sound a bit self-absorbed, but never in my life have I been so depressed listening to someone agree with me on the internet.

  58. THX 1138 by mcswell · · Score: 1

    Time to watch it again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... (@1:25).

  59. Re:Don't be fooled by the words "Scientific Americ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is part of why I let my scientific american subscription lapse. They got far too political and less sciency. Also, apparently that's why ESPN is hemorraging subscribers but I could give a fuck about sportsball.

  60. These are all modern "problems." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I never recall cavemen complaining about being "depressed."

    1. Re: These are all modern "problems." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And they all lived a long and prosper lufe of less than 20 years.

    2. Re:These are all modern "problems." by Megol · · Score: 1

      They didn't complain about simple infections either - they just died.

    3. Re:These are all modern "problems." by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 1

      WTF? Look around dude, we are a long way from cavemen. For all we know those stupid drawings on cave walls were made by the depressed guy who didn't want to go outside anymore.

      --
      There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
    4. Re:These are all modern "problems." by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Nah, they just jumped off the cliff. That does cure depression, actually. Side effects include death, though.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:These are all modern "problems." by dehachel12 · · Score: 1

      >WTF? Look around dude, we are a long way from cavemen.
      I am not entirely sure if you're joking, but have you seen the news lately? Humans are barbarians. latest example : Aleppo.

  61. Re:Don't be fooled by the words "Scientific Americ by mcswell · · Score: 2

    FWIW, I'm a linguist (more in computational linguistics these days, but reasonably well based in several theories of linguistics). So I read his two articles about Chomsky. I can't speak to the other articles, but his articles on Chomsky make a lot of sense, and seem accurate enough.

    I'm not qualified to pass judgment on most of his other articles (and I've only read a handful), but his article about the consciousness problem seems reasonable: https://blogs.scientificameric...

    So I'm not sure it's justifiable to call him a kook.

  62. What is normal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One thing that has always bothered me about typical psychiatric diagnosis is the difficulty in establishing an objective "normal" and then the next step, individually evaluating a patient and determining how many standard deviations they are from the norm and if that even needs treatment. For example, ADHD has seen an explosion of diagnosis. Interestingly these tend to be highly biased toward boys who are on the bottom half of the age for their given grade level. On the academic level there may be all sorts of gold standards for diagnosing stuff like this, but in the real world a teacher calls a parent-teacher conference and a boy who is bit on the young side and a little rowdy ends up getting put on Ritalin.

    Similarly for depression. Sometimes life sucks. Pets, friends and family members die. People lose jobs, get divorced, have cash problems. Feeling bad in those circumstances is normal. Again, I'm sure there is an academic gold standard that asks questions like this and rightly determines that you are not clinically depressed because your sister died, you're just sad. But in the real world there is no money in that for a practicing psychologist, so they give you some anti-depressants and a follow-up appointment.

  63. Could tom cruise be right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe the world has gone to hell in a hand basket if the Scientology clock is telling the correct time.

    1. Re:Could tom cruise be right? by Anomalyst · · Score: 1

      Tom Cruise being right is about as likely as him being tall.

      --
      There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
  64. Also... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...no minorities.

  65. Re:I am a single by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've had a similar experience to yours. Three months pushing through the side effects including erectile dysfunction, inability to reach orgasm and then full blown loss of libido. I didn't experience the change in identity but had a slew of other effects. I quit overnight and had the 'brain zaps' and depression.

    The reason I'm replying is that it took months before my sex drive started to come back, months more before it was even close to 'normal' and longer again before I had any confidence in that. Not great news, but hang in there. Getting back to regular exercise helped me. Trying to eat well and making sure to get 10-20 minutes of direct sunlight each day. I also had some success with magnesium supplements You're recovering from putting your brain through a wringer. It will take time to settle down. In the mean time, do what you can to get there and don't beat yourself up for not being able to do as much as you might want to.

    It will get better.

  66. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This explains the trump vote. Seriously.

  67. Drugs are hard to use by movdqa · · Score: 1

    For those that research these drugs for a family member, one look at the potential side effects has to make deciding on whether or not to grant permission can be a really tough choice. There are a number of drugs and one may work while another doesn't. Or one may have minimal side-effects while others have a lot of side-effects. There's the cost of drugs and the experimentation period of getting the dosage right. I don't know whether or not these things are addictive but that's another potential problem. If caring family is around to help make an informed decision, then I think that they'd be in the camp of using as little as possible as this stuff while making the patient's life comfortable, bearable or livable. It seems like our problem is that family isn't available for a lot of people with psychiatric problems.

  68. yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    retired therapist. it's bad. worse than you can know.

  69. Re:Don't be fooled by the words "Scientific Americ by Phics · · Score: 1

    Absolutely. Not saying it's wrong. I'm saying it takes time to get it right, and while doctors may have that discipline, many of the patients and people trying to support those patients simply don't.

    --
    There are two types of people in the world; those who believe there are two types of people, and those who don't.
  70. Telling lies about me = "best ya got"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: I don't do drugs & am not under psychiatric care nor do I require meds: I suspect you need both (or a good punch in the teeth you libelous little FUCK... fact is, I absolutely HATE heroin addicts (they start on opioids))

    * What is it LIKE posting unidentifiably like the trolling coward you are? Do you actually look your woman in the eye KNOWING you're pure scum?? I doubt you can (assuming you have a conscience or a woman (doubtful on the latter)).

    APK

    P.S.=> Just how badly have I handed you your ass that you have to talk behind my back like some jilted bitch would, hmmm? apk

    1. Re: Telling lies about me = "best ya got"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. WTF?

      APK is an abbreviation for "Addicted to Pain Killers" ... not a reference.

    2. Re: Telling lies about me = "best ya got"? by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      Wow. WTF?

      APK is an abbreviation for "Addicted to Pain Killers" ... not a reference.

      Heh, you don't come around here often do you?

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    3. Re: Telling lies about me = "best ya got"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the old days we'd have said "You must be new here".

    4. Re: Telling lies about me = "best ya got"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it was an android installer LOL

    5. Re: Telling lies about me = "best ya got"? by jsh1972 · · Score: 1

      APK - alprazolam, Percocet, ketamine. I think that explains the posts ;-)

  71. Capitalism + Psychopath CEOs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only way to thrive the current work environment in the US is through medication.

    Our own President calls us consumers.
    The television tells us our breath is bad, our cars are too old, our houses too small, and our women naturally ugly.

    At work we are just employee numbers to increase the numbers.
    Human Resources is just that- ensuring the steady depletion of each human's resources.

    Better do what the boss says, so his boss's boss can get another yacht.
    Don't like it? Leave your friends, family, and hometown alone to move 300 miles away.
    Experience the same thing there, because only the most vicious, insensitive, and greedy may own companies.

  72. Re:The problem by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

    We do know that prescribing meds for ADHD doesn't substantially improve outcomes in cohort studies and regional studies on average ... but we're doing it any way. The most generous way of interpreting this is that they don't do much of anything, the scary way is to say it does help some people. Because that would mean it would harm others to get the averages to work out, our doctors just can't predict the outcome.

  73. Treatable but not treated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was told many, many years ago by a close friend who was studying for a Doctorate in Psychology (I know, not the same as Psychiatry) that if I ever had any Mental Illness issues that I speak to him first so that he could recommend a suitable professional to treat whatever issue I may have.

    According to him, 90+ % of all the practitioners I would find if I chose one at random (such as via the phone book) or was referred to by my doctor, or was referred to by any Health Insurer or company-supplied professional would simply treat every symptom with drugs. The drug therapy was the least expensive option.

    He explained that almost every Psychiatric disorder was fully treatable with non-drug therapy, but that it took time ... perhaps two years ... and costs the most. Plus those who practised therapy were rare, and anyone paying for help would resist their services, and instead steer me toward the cheaper "Drug Him" practitioners. He insisted that I insist and that I get the name of someone from him, rather than anyone else.

    I never had cause to take him up on his offer, but certainly I never forgot what he said.

  74. Your sig is missing 'full' by tpgp · · Score: 1

    Any reason not to say "I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy?"

    --
    My pics.
  75. Whoops - bad quote by tpgp · · Score: 1

    Gaaah, bad copy pasta - I meant to write:

    I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full frontal lobotomy.

    --
    My pics.
  76. SSRI Withdrawal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No one wants to acknowledge that these drugs are a bitch to get off of.

  77. Another fucking nutcase makes the front page by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Heck, we hardly prescribed at all in the 1870s or 1930s, back when there were no people of color, no women, no gay people, no people of various "ablements", no oppression, and no unhappiness. Everything was perfect back then. Funny how we can't figure out how to get back to those perfect days. We must have become stupid.

  78. Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Projectile vomiting wasn't pleasant.
    Otherwise they just take time and efforts away from something useful - I hear E research is going well.

  79. Ask The Scientologists!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is an organization called "CCHR", "Citizens Commission on Human Rights", that puts up flyers on campus and laundromats and collects stories in prisons and from ambulance chasers and the Weekly World News about psychiatric abuse and republishes them to discredit real psychiatric care. The problem is that they're a Scientology front group, tasked with discrediting the cult's competitors for minds and money and people who need help.

    Think I'm kidding? Look up what happened ot "Cult Awareness Network", which was sued to death by hundreds of frivolous lawsuits, and the lawyer who finally bankrupted the group was sued by his own clients for serving the cult's desires, not the client's. Brother, I cannot make this stuff up. If you check the old address of their website or call them on the phone, you're talking to a Scientology staff member.

    Not that all psychiatric treatment is legitimate: I just ran into a gender-changing bozo, who's advertising their completely unqualified "psychothoerapy" on Facebook. Unfortunately, "psychotherapy" does not require a license, as opposed to "psychology" or "psychiatry" which do. They're treating "PTSD and trauma and abuse" and have no qualification or experience other than being raped themselves, and advertise on Facebook about how "they can do clever stuff with your FSA" to pay them, and have never actually completed a degree nor taken a courses about "orgazinational training: from the "Center for Self-Leadership". Guess what that is? A program whose own instructors admit that they pass your if you show up in class at all, and who claim that training has nothing to do with competence. I spoke with 3 of them when I got wind of this bozo. But boy, those instructors are sure happy to take their money to stroke each other's egos about how much better than real therapists they are. Frankly, I'd prefer the Scientologists, at least they admit they're following the galactic emperor Xenu rather than getting caught up in Aleister Crowley's ideas about gender identity.

    I know real psychiatrists, psychologists, counselors, and working staff in the field, and they work their asses off trying to help people There's a lot chaff in the field. But check their credentials. The real therapists make no secret of exactly what training they have, and from where.

  80. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by coteriescavenger · · Score: 0

    Said the welfare dependent leftist as he pops another pill ;)

  81. Re:Fucking shit aspies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We should do that in a humane way. Euthanize the mentally and the chronically ill. Like in Yoorop.

  82. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And what if I think the same thing but am not on welfare, taking pills, and am most definitely not a leftist?

  83. Re:I am a single by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

    I actually enjoyed the lack of sex drive sertraline gave me (unfortunately just for a couple of weeks, then it gradually came back). Not so much the always clenched jaws and the diarrhoea. But as long as it helped I continued to take it (about a year) Switched to mirtazapine a month ago without any tapering. Mirtazapine has its own set of side effects, but as long it works...

    Then again I have been struggling with a depression for the best part of the past twenty years - anything that helps is welcome. And sertraline really helped a lot in the first 6 months, then it slowly stopped working. I took just 25 mg, but going any higher didn't help more, just made the side effects more pronounced. So yep, I whis I'd started taking psychiatric medication years ago instead of being scared off by the horror stories like yours.

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  84. Psychiatry is a fraud, has been illegal in past by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every so often it is revealed that psychiatrists are frauds. The technique and methods are not based on science. They may have an impact on their victims. It may seem like whatever psychiatry is peddling today is working. Tomorrow however we'll find out that puncturing peoples brains through the eyeball, freezing them in cold icy water, or today drugging them doesn't actually help. What psychiatrists do amounts to torture and I've seen people *royally* f*cked by these people. They are self-serving profit driven a-holes. They are the scum of the universe. They are right up there with lawyers, politicians, rapists, and murders. I'd rather have any of these others as neighbours over a psychiatrist.

  85. Re:Don't be fooled by the words "Scientific Americ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders which the industry works off adds and removes disorders based on little more than a vote. Quack or not the guy isn't wrong in concluding psychologists hurt more than they help. Homosexuality was a "mental disorder" for the longest time and they continue to include other sexual orientations that are unpopular rather than based off any accurate actually scientific evidence or even basic logic your typical non-deranged individual can understand.

    Psychologists come up with 'solutions' (be it electrocuting people, freezing them, poking shit into peoples brains via eye sockets, or drugs) to problems using scientifically flawed studies and then fail at statistics to draw conclusions. Example. They'll go into prisons to study paedophiles and conclude paedophiles are dangerous and mentally deranged. Think about that for a moment. If you draw from a crowd of people who are already imprisoned for acting on ideas/thoughts/interests which most average people know will result in prison time it won't provide an proper sampling. You'll only get those whom go beyond to commit crimes and that'll result in a disproportionate number with psychological disorders (it's a readily accepted fact that the majority of people in prison have psychological issues).

    If you studied doctors in prison you would end up drawing the same conclusion that doctors are psychologically deranged. With paedophiles it's near impossible to study because we as a society fear them. What we know about rape is the majority of rapes are acts of convenience and not that of sexual orientation. You aren't going to have paedophiles voluntarily identifying themselves because of the danger the rest of society posses to them. What you see in the movies and on TV any sane-person should reasonably be able to conclude is not representative of reality. TV shows and movies disproportionately paint paedophiles (and in a by-gone era homosexuals) as dangers to society when there simply isn't any evidence of that (ie as rapists and murders, which the statistics don't back up, even if you look at paedophiles arrested you won't find many serial killers or rapists among them, most are charged with child porn).

    Don't get me wrong. This is not to say paedophiles as portrayed in popular media aren't creepy. My vision of them is certainly that. It's just not reality as the statistics evidence.

    Go watch 1950's Anti-Homosexual PSA - Boys Beware and you'll see just what I'm talking about (if you somehow changed peoples perceptions paedophiles probably wouldn't come off so creepy- homosexuals used to come off as creepy too- but no any longer):

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17u01_sWjRE

  86. Anti-Depressants = Useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More and more studies conclude that current medication prescribed against depression is less effective than a placebo.

  87. Re:Yes, lets: They've harmed you obviously, lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kowalski, we KNOW you're not under psychiatric care nor taking your meds, because ***YOU'RE FUCKING UNRESTRAINEDLY BATSHIT CRAZY***!
    Go back to molesting third-grade boys and leave the rest of us alone. Fuckwit.

  88. The main reason is crap therapists by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

    Therapy only takes a few months when the therapist doesn't know what they're doing.

    That's not going to change any time soon, hence medication.

  89. 30 more minutes of sleep everyday by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This will probably help many people get off medications but it's just easier to give medications.

  90. Re:Strong relationship bonds for good mental healt by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

    I've found encounters with emotional intimacy quickly deteriorates my mental health. When I'm emotionally-hurt and insecure, I get away from people; rather than healing, I get worse if people start crowding around with their sympathy. The entire notion of an emotional support structure as a critical component in treating depression, ADHD, or other psychiatric conditions works completely-backwards in my case, to the point of eventually driving me to violent antisocial behavior.

    I guess violence is the correct answer to what is perceived as a constant, unending, harmful assault. The perception might be a bit off, but the outcome makes sense. I cope well: I simply don't have any friends, because there's essentially nothing good about having friends, in the same way there's nothing good about using a razor blade to cut yourself repeatedly.

  91. Re:Don't be fooled by the words "Scientific Americ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's the money shot:

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-real-science-behind-scientology/

    Scientologists are all about being anti-psychiatry, to the extreme.

    Considering the entire history of Scientology has been revealed and it is very much a made up scheme by L. Ron Hubbard to avoid taxes, that article is bullshit. And so is anything else from that site. It would not surprise me if it were partially funded by Scientology as a "gateway" into their horseshit.

  92. Broken logic by holophrastic · · Score: 1

    There's no sense to thinking that medicating something would make it better. In this case, like in all cases, medicating the issue only makes it less-worse. It'll always be a gradual decline. Headache pills don't make you superman. They reduce the headache 99%, they don't eliminate it, and they have side-effects.

    There are loads of reasons for modern-day psychiatric problems. I'd bet that most of them surround being indoors -- lack of light, lack of exercise, lack of real-world animal problems, lack of proper fresh air, lack of visual distance, lack of colour, lack of contrast, lack of sun. I'd bet that the rest surround a lifestyle based on work -- lack of variety, high stress, mostly indoors, all-hours, lack of control.

    So given that the solution is a change in lifestyle, and probably a change of environment, the medication is nothing more than a crutch. If you don't solve the problem, congrats-to-you, now you live with a crutch. Gradual decline.

  93. Psychiatric medications are awesome by scourfish · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I suffer from anxiety and depression that runs in my family. I used to be afraid to enter a building if there were other people in it, this invisible wall kept me from doing things I enjoyed, and I would often feel worthless, despite having a decent lifestyle with what could only be described as first world problems. Anxiety attacks that felt like either a heart attack or this sense of impending death occured almost every day. These do not occur due to some sort of emotional trigger. I tried exercise, eating healthy, and relaxing. There was some benefit, but nothing that stopped the anxiety attacks. Sertraline has been life changing for me. I'm able to go outside, I'm less nervous in large groups or around strangers, and I'm more accepting of both my gifts and my shortcoming. I haven't had an anxiety attack for years. I don't miss having one. The only major side effect is that I have to pee a lot, and I get nauseous if I miss a dose, but I'm willing to make that trade off. I wish I could go back in time and reclaim 10 more years prior to starting zoloft. I recommend that critics of psychiatric medication watch Stephen Fry's "The Secret Life of a Manic Depressive" or listen to the experiences of people who rely on those medications before making blanket statements of "useless" or some conspiratorial claim.

  94. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by vel-ex-tech · · Score: 1

    (Meta: Posting in a discussion about psychiatric meds using a style that's more crazy than usual. Sure! Why not!)

    But we know that you're a transSEXual from the Transylvania Galaxy here to make Christmas illegal! That's the only reason! That's why you hate God Emperor Trump! You're in cahoots with the lizard people! Get over it! She lost, you leftist transSEXual!

    Don't cry about gender being innate you transSEXual freak! We've heard all the excuses we should accept raping little girls in the women's room! Everybody knows that gender is a social construct, and it's YOUR failure to assimilate to your assigned gender you transSEXual rapist!

    She lost! Get over it! Trump! Trump! Trump! Lock her up! Lock her up! Lock her up! Now sieg heil to Santa you heathen leftist politically correct transSEXual rapist!

  95. Different world maybe? by ErichTheRed · · Score: 1

    I wonder if it's not necessarily over-medication, but a reduction in under-reporting. Even in the golden age of the middle class (1950s or so in the US) people never talked about mental issues. Now, everyone talks about them, everyone's in therapy and everyone's taking something. It used to be somewhat normal for the father of a family to come home from work and get exceedingly drunk if he had a bad day -- that's not seen as normal now. Same thing with smoking - it's a really bad habit, but having almost every adult inhaling nicotine all day probably masked a lot of problems. So, the reduction in self-medication along with a reduction in the stigma associated with getting help might explain this. One problem I see is that if you need real help, not just a bunch of pills, that part of the system isn't there anymore. Most states are completely done with inpatient mental health services, only providing enough funding to house the truly dangerous and some of the cases that are hopeless and can't ever transition to a normal life. There's no way to call a time-out and dig into what's really wrong.

    I do think that society has changed to a much higher level of under-the-surface stress. Those of us who work in IT for big companies are just waiting for the MBAs to finish their reports that will prompt the CIO to offshore the workforce. Even if you're not a "model consumer" everything costs a lot and is geared to having two well-compensated spouses working. As a parent in that spot, I can attest that it's very hard keeping all the balls in the air - you have to simultaneously focus on your job, your financial situation, your kids and your spouse. It's very stressful and I could definitely see people losing their grip on things if any extra stress gets heaped on top of it.

    One trend I've been seeing over about 25 years of working is the flattening of organizations and the changes in work. Back in the 50s, that father i talked about might be a mid-level paper pusher or work on a factory line doing basic work. Factory work and basic corporate work is disappearing. With flatter organizations, ordinary workers aren't as protected from the constant raining down of office politics...I know i have several virtual managers all pulling on me for various things. Corporate politics is nasty business and regular workers used to be protected by supervisors...now the MBA theory is recommending 5 or less levels between you and the CEO. This sounds great in theory - less bureaucracy, etc. but it exposes people to a lot of extra stress they wouldn't normally have.

  96. Your point is moot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Prescriptions are up by 10% and ~17% of people are on some kind of psychiatric drug in the US. The use of medicine to treat illness has also increased significantly. You can make a reasonable argument for over - medication but to target psychiatry(instead of psychiatric drugs as your argument actually supports), Is a diffecult thing to do.

    The consensus is that better diagnostic methods like the DSM and standardized training as well as an increase in the number of people living to advanced old age is the most likely cause for increased rates of mental illness. Your assertion that psychiatry or psychiatric drugs(still not sure which one you meant) is the cause is the same as blaming your sysadmin for breaking your computer because he fixed it last.

  97. 'Courageous' unidentifiable anonymous 'hero' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: LMAO - It's what you are weasel. I don't molest kids (pedos are evil) - so go f yourself punk!

    APK

    P.S.=> If you were in front of me & said that I'd splatter your pussy face fucker - I shit you not... apk

    1. Re:'Courageous' unidentifiable anonymous 'hero' by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 1

      Question then, why do YOU post as an anonymous coward? Is it perhaps your flavour of insanity isn't valued around here?

      --
      So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
    2. Re:'Courageous' unidentifiable anonymous 'hero' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Same AC as above) LOL. Of course you're a paedo. Threatening physical violence to someone on the Internet is the DEFINITION of crazy. Like yourself, for example. Dire in a fire, Kowalski.

    3. Re: 'Courageous' unidentifiable anonymous 'hero' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dire in a fire
      Crap in a flood

  98. Re: Good question (+5, Insane) by D00MSlayer · · Score: 1

    Perfect.

  99. Sure It Has Declined by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    With parents who decided to try and be their kids BFFs, and with schools that hand out participation ribbons, it's no wonder kids grow up not learning how to deal with adversity. Then suddenly after four years of partying in college, they're left with a huge pile of debt, and limited job prospects, and poor coping mechanisms. I'd be willing to bet that the demographics also point mostly toward middle to upper class millennials for the increase in issues. Of course, there's still a large cohort of baby boomers who've been unable to make a decent living since they got fired during the recession...sure, they're probably working, but I said "decent" living.

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  100. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    This explains the response to trump victory. Seriously.

    FTFY. Seriously, I have a couple close friends who've told me that their millennial aged kids called them in tears after the election. Fucking snowflakes, learn to deal with it. And, for the record, I didn't vote for him.

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  101. Yes and No by rhyous · · Score: 1

    I think that the medications are great for those who need it. For them the meds are great and sometimes life changing.

    However, I think there is a large portion who are prescribed such medicine that really need to be prescribed nothing more than a healthier diet and at least 10 minutes of sun a day or try to get more than 4 hours a sleep a night. Try 8 hours for a few weeks.. Or perhaps need to be simply told that five 64oz soft drinks a day is not good for you. DUH!

    And don't get me started on giving kids drugs simply because a kid has a lot of energy . . .

  102. Big Pharma don't care about anything but profits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The USA is the worst nation in the world, the rampant corporate corruption has marred every aspect of public and private life. The drug companies are responsible for millions of deaths every year, and it's all business as usual.

  103. I'm not into going slower & being tracked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: FAKE NAME online for a FAKE LIFE "registered 'lusers'" are slower/tracked in javascript+cookie chains & posting histories... you're fools.

    * Do you have ANY idea how much FASTER this site (or any really) works minus all that bullshit & how much SAFER you are minus using it?

    It's NOT like slashdot & sourceforge haven't served up malicious ads or malware before (they have) you know.

    APK

    P.S.=> You asked & "there ya go" - it works for me (I'm not as slow OR trackable as you "registered 'luser'" FAKE NAME ONLINE wannabes are)... apk

    1. Re:I'm not into going slower & being tracked by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 1

      I don't buy the "slower" part. My connection to the world is very, very fast, so fast as to be almost instantaneous. So, try again.
      I think the reason you post anon is so people can't block your bullshit from every thread that you spew.

      --
      So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
  104. Libeling me isn't legal & crazy shithead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject "Mr. 'courageous' unidentifiable anonymous' whimp" (what you definitely are, no man).

    * You sure act "big" calling me pedo & drug addict libeling me w/ falsehoods regarding me.

    APK

    P.S.=> I bet (seriously) that were you in front of me doing it you wouldn't walk away in 1 piece - I shit you not. If I had to do time for it? Well worth it.

    See, It's disgusting little PIGS like you that make the web awful - do nothing zeros with nothing better to do than SPREAD THEIR OWN MISERY to others because you KNOW you're losers... apk

    1. Re:Libeling me isn't legal & crazy shithead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh Kowalski, I'm not libeling you, I'm telling the truth. We all know you like fucking little boys. If you'd stay on your meds, maybe you wouldn't enjoy it so much. If you can't stay on your meds, maybe we can find you a little-boy-fucker support group. Or maybe a 300-pound bull dyke with a strap-on rubber dildo can fuck you in the ass until you beg for more purple rubber dick deeper in your bleeding asshole. At least THAT would distract you from your endless need to fuck little boys. Maybe.

      And we know you're fucking crazy, because you're going to spastically respond to THIS as well. Spazz away, fuckwit.

  105. The drugs work but poorly and haphardly by lamer01 · · Score: 1

    All of these drugs have severe mind-altering side effects. Memory loss sometime permanent is a frequent complaint. Dulling of emotions another. Of course, along with all the dulling, the bad thoughts are also dulled and thus the effectiveness. The drugs make you less human so that you can live with the fact that being human is a tough sordid ordeal. Hell, being alive is a tough sordid ordeal. It's just that since we are sentient, we question everything and that causes the root problem. I think that if depression is caught early and diet and exercise is introduced, it can be prevented from becoming life-consuming but it is not recognized early enough and it becomes severe, there is no times for games, the drugs are then needed to prevent a much worse outcome.

    1. Re:The drugs work but poorly and haphardly by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      No, the meds don't all have severe side effects. You're way overgeneralizing.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  106. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by coteriescavenger · · Score: 1

    It's a joke derived from how he thought Trump voters were crazy, but that there's really more leftists taking psychiatric meds and on disability than conservatives.

  107. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by coteriescavenger · · Score: 1

    Nothing crazy about this post...

  108. The system DO NOT WORK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The truth is that medications are no good. Doing nothing or placebo may give better results.

    The meds often cause the very problems they are supposed to solve or are close to placebo. Psychiatry also do not use objective scientific/medical measurements and is opinion based which makes it impossible to have progress.

    Additionally, results in developing (poor) countries are BETTER than in developed rich countries so the system do not work well at all.

    https://nonpsychiatry.files.wordpress.com/2016/12/affidivitofrobertwhitaker.pdf

  109. The system DOES NOT WORK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Results in developing poor countries are BETTER than in developed rich countries. That shows how badly the system works.

    https://nonpsychiatry.files.wordpress.com/2016/12/affidivitofrobertwhitaker.pdf

  110. No I don't do any of that... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: You're one sick weirdo imo trying to project your issues onto me - I don't do a damn thing or need what you say.

    APK

    P.S.=> Dude you need, like (Vanilla Sky style) "tech support" or something, lol - WoW... apk

  111. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    In order to get psychiatric treatment, you have to be willing to get it. I've run into enough people who thought my depression was a character flaw, and would never admit such in themselves, and my guess is that they tended to vote Trump.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  112. The Treatment is worse than the illness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many prescription drug commercials list death as a side effect? How many anti-depressants cause the very suicidal thoughts they were intended to treat? It's an oxymoron. Drugs are supposed to HELP but instead they end up hurting. And the loss of sexual drive pushes many people away from anti-depressants.

  113. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by coteriescavenger · · Score: 1

    To be honest, a lot of the time, it is a character issue. Hear me out. Most depression happens because things are going very wrong in one's life, which is usually (but not always) a result of past decisions. I've been depressed, and I recovered stronger than before. Most people do not belong on psychiatric drugs. They're too dangerous. They may help one be a productive citizen, but in my experience with family members, they beget their own disorders, and can disrupt one's ability to establish meaningful relationships.

    On the other hand, your friends may have jumped to assumptions about your situation, but we all do. Most people don't have the energy to deal with their own problems, let alone somebody else's. Some things in life we all go through alone before we fully realize the importance of friends.

    To sum it up, I don't think Trump supporters need antidepressants to see the light and vote for entitlements ;p

  114. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    There's different types of depression. There's situational depression, in which you're depressed because of the crap happening to you. I'm no expert, but my impression is that antidepressants are of very limited, if any, use in treating this. Mine was not situational. Some people asked me what I was depressed about, and the answer was, basically, nothing. That, I believe, is where antidepressants are useful. I'll agree that they are often overprescribed.

    I'm also not over my depression, although I keep improving. A few years ago, I felt unhappy, instead of depressed, for the first time in something like fifteen years. I haven't seen that antidepressants in particular cause more problems than they can solve, and my ability to establish meaningful relations is far greater with them than without them. There are other psychiatric medications that have more serious ill effects, but the question is not "Is this person better off healthy or on those meds?" but rather "Is this person better off on these meds or off them?"

    There's experimental evidence that depressives perceive the world more realistically than non-depressives. Since my impression is that Trump supporters are looking at him overly optimistically, and listening to what they want to hear, we'd be better off if they were on depressants.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  115. It's common-sense (less work is faster render) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: If you're not rendering ads or running scripts you run faster (it's human senses apparent) & resolving locally from RAM once hosts is cached IS FASTER vs. remote DNS (& not anywhere NEAR the security issues dns has, or bloat + inefficiency if installed locally (not to mention power consumption, more moving parts for breakdown/exploit, & resources consumed).

    APK

    P.S.=> I think the reason you stated what you did is to make ME look GOOD (thanks, because after I shut you down easily above, you've done so (doing me a favor))... apk

  116. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by coteriescavenger · · Score: 1

    Fair enough, but I'm also familiar with "seeing things more realistically", and on the scale of special snowflake to cynical pessimist, conservatives don't tend to be snowflakes.

    The reason Trump supporters are so excited is because we haven't had a feasible opportunity on the ballot to vote against government corruption in a long time, and it was the perfect way to show what we think of Political Correctness, and put the SJWs in their place. It's not about optimism. Whether Trump is the vehicle or not, the movement will continue to grow because people are affected by PC politics.

  117. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    Trump and Pence are apparently special snowflakes. The theater is not a safe place, although you usually can get trigger warnings.

    Voting for Trump was not a vote against corruption. The guy bribed a state attorney general into not prosecuting him, after all. He's known for underpaying contractual obligations and telling the people stiffed to sue him.

    The most common use of "political correctness", in my observation, is to behave like an asshole and call objections "political correctness". Attacks on PC are usually linked to racism, sexism, or other bigotry. The movement you described is primarily white men who don't think for themselves, and that demographic is shrinking relative to the population.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  118. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by coteriescavenger · · Score: 1

    Oh, now I see, you support trigger warnings, political correctness, and condemn racism in the same breath as generalizing white men -- you're an SJW! You're the reason we put Trump in office. Trigger warning, you might find the rest of this post offensive. Please locate your nearest safe space in case of dangerous ideas.

    The only people who think Trump is a special snowflake ARE SNOWFLAKES who don't know humor when it smacks them on the face. Trump constantly satirizes PC culture and leftists actually thinks he's being serious!
    You can say "political correctness" is used to promote racism, but that's not true, nobody believes that. It's been in use by intellectuals and academia for decades to refer to the insane ideas liberals have about changing the English language. The truth is, people are tired of being called racist for no good reason, and saying it more certainly won't change their vote.
    The only reason natural born white Americans are shrinking in proportion is because corrupt politicians are letting immigrants in at unprecedented rates. White people aren't disappearing, they're just getting displaced. Do you think that is sustainable? Either you get a huge nationalist movement, or immigrants make America another big government third world country, and "white people" go build their wealth and freedom somewhere else.

    Regardless of what trump does in office, votes for him were votes against corruption and SJWs, because that's what he campaigned on. If he doesn't fix these issues, then the movement will just grow until someone does. I don't expect you to understand any of this. You're too indoctrinated in the left to see any of this happening.

  119. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    You need to work on your reading comprehension. Saying that a group is mostly white men is not saying anything in general about white men. There are other unpleasant groups that are primarily not white, but bringing those up wasn't relevant.

    I don't know how to point out that there's lots of racism in our society without sounding like I'm saying some people are racist. If you're not racist, good. I'm not talking about you. If you are, it's your fault, not mine. Am I supposed to not say what I see because it will offend special right-wing snowflakes? Should I give trigger warnings when I say something I've noticed? Those of you who are white racist and sexist men (and there's lots of you) can certainly come up with safe places.

    Immigration isn't as big a deal as it was early in the Twentieth Century, when people complained about the influx of largely Catholic populations like Irish and Polish. Learn some history.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  120. Re: Good question (+5, Insightful) by coteriescavenger · · Score: 1

    There was no point in saying they were white men except to be racist and sexist. We do have racism problem in America, but it's not from conservatives, or white men, it's from left wing radicals, like BLM and SJWs -- the ones who tell you who the racists are. The most racist white people are tame in the midst of an immigration crisis, while BLM shuts down traffic, shoots cops, and attacks white citizens who passively resist. It's not a contained issue like the KKK has been for decades...it's TOLERATED, and even publicly cheered on.

    Comparing the Irish Catholic immigration to the current immigration situation is like comparing stale water to arsenic water. The Catholics, while very different from protestants, largely held the same core beliefs. After all they're both christians with work ethic who believe in limited government and human rights. Not even close to the suicide pill America is swallowing today.

    Right-wing snowflakes with trigger warnings and safe spaces? You know those come straight out of the liberal handbook, right. It's how describe themselves, not conservatives. Conservatives don't ask for safe spaces, but for simply the right to free speech anymore. Conservatives are actively suppressed in educational institutions, corporate media, and corporate social media. Even with the internet, it's possible for traditional American values to slip by you and your peers never spoken. If you want answers, you need to look farther than slashdot.

  121. Yes, lets: They've obviously harmed you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: I suspect those drugs have hurt you VERY badly (along w/ trolling me & me handing you your ass MANY times).

    * What is it LIKE posting unidentifiably like the trolling coward you are? Do you actually look your woman in the eye KNOWING you're pure scum?? I doubt you can (assuming you have a conscience or a woman (doubtful on the latter)).

    APK

    P.S.=> Just how badly have I handed you your ass that you have to talk behind my back like some jilted bitch would, hmm? apk