Anti depressant query.....

Hi everyone

Just wondering if anyone has some info on antidepressants for me.

I was on Citalopram about a month ago (see my previous post: Do I have SAD?) and I stopped after 3 days because they made me feel really bleak and suicidal. The cold turkey was without a doubt the most awful thing I have ever experienced. It gradually wore off but I now find that every alternate week I slide back into a horrible nauseous, panicky mess. This feeling lasts for around 4 days then fades away and I am fine again for another week, only for it to return again! Has anyone else felt like this after stopping SSRI's ? I realise I was only on them for 3 days, but I wasnt feeling this bad before I took them! Has anyone else felt this way? Have they done some kind of damage to me?

Fuzz

I will try to find some info for you Fuzzymonkey. This sounds like an awful experience. Hang in there, it will be OK.

Linda.

I'm gobsmacked that anyone could read what this person wrote and suggest that what they need may be to try a different antidepressant. A selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor caused changes in their system to a significant degree. It is entirely possible that this damage will be compounded if they take another drug. Would you be willing to go through the experience described of cyclical panic/depression attacks, of unknown duration, in hopes that the drug that "does the trick" will be found? BTW this is likely to be what the doctor will recommend, unless luck would have it that this particular doctor is more knowledgeable than most about the effects of SSRIs on the body.

Fuzzymonkey, I belong to a Yahoo list called Withdrawal and Recovery where people go to safely discontinue psychotropic drugs. I asked the list owner about the symptoms you described and she said that this is a normal reaction. Within one to two days, these drugs cause structural alterations to the brain. She prefers to give advice via posts on the list so that other group members can read them and hopefully benefit from them, and she says you are welcome to join if you would like her specific advice.

You can read what I have written in Nutrition Info, though my fear is that it may not be specific enough for your particular needs. I don't have the medical or nutritional knowledge of the list owner. If you would like to join you can find the URL in Antidepressant Info, or you are welcome to contact me.

I wish I could be of further help. Please rest assured that you are not alone, that this is not a one-off freaky experience. These drugs alter the body in ways that many people, even many doctors, are unaware of. Some people have more dramatic reactions to others, it's down to our biochemical individuality.

Best wishes,
Linda.

If you are referring to the discussion we had in the Antidepressant Info strand, then I'm sorry it ended up the way it did. What I would ask is that anyone who talks there with me reads the other posts there first so that it can be an informed discussion.

I maintain the belief that taking antidepressants is a personal decision. However I also believe that it should be an informed one. I have been accused of scaremongering, but the info I give is based on good evidence, and one reason I started the Antidepressant Info topic was to provide sources for what I've been saying. The truth can indeed be uncomfortable. It can be uncomfortable and disturbing, as well, to realise that most doctors are not aware of this information, or dismiss it -- the very people we have been taught to entrust our health, our very lives, to.

I also maintain that it is the case here that if Fuzzymonkey takes another one of these drugs, it is likely that the associated problems will worsen. Obviously I can't make any guarantees one way or another, but common sense alone dictates that trying more of these drugs is a health risk.

In answer to your final question, I don't have medical qualifications, and I wouldn't pretend to. I have read widely on antidepressants, which is something that anyone can do if they want to. The internet is also a powerful learning tool. Catherine, the owner of the Withdrawal and Recovery list, has extensive knowledge about medications, nutrition, and alternative medicine. She would prefer that her personal info is not generally on display to the public, but I have come to trust her over the year that I have known her, and I have seen her help many people with specific advice in the areas I've mentioned.

I will try not to get into debates with existing members here about the topic of drugs, but the person who started this thread is having difficulties and I wanted to try to help to address those.

Are you a member of W&R Purplecrab? Is this because you want to discontinue your medication? I'm not aware of anything I have said there that should be insulting to any members here. If I did say something you found offensive, please call it to my attention and we can talk about it.

Regards,
Linda.

Thanks for sharing that info Purplecrab. If indeed you are on the W&R list, it might just be an idea to look at the posts there, past and present, and learn what you can. There is also a wealth of info in the files. Please also keep in mind that whatever I or anyone else says there is within the context of a list where the members are against the use of these drugs. I know that there is a different audience here on this list, and that those who take meds and are content with that would indeed feel upset about some of the things I would say on W&R. I hope I do well with separating the two, but sometimes things do need to be said here. What if several people convinced Fuzzymonkey to give a different med a try, or go see the doctor, who then persuaded them -- and they again felt suicidal within days of taking it, as was the case the first time around -- and this time the suicide was acted out? How can we even consider suggesting anyone take that risk? I hope we are all speaking here purely out of interest in helping someone do what is healthy for them.

Regards,
Linda.

I'm gobsmacked that anyone could read what this person wrote and suggest that what they need may be to try a different antidepressant. A selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor caused changes in their system to a significant degree. It is entirely possible that this damage will be compounded if they take another drug.

No. No and no again. This stops here and this stops now. Linda I haven't been around this cyber space long. However, in that time I have noticed your outspoken and incorrect analysis of anti-depressants.

Firstly you should make it clear just what qualifications you have in medical research or practice when you discuss this topic with people. I doubt from the vast inaccuracies you convey that you have either.

Secondly this bulletin board or any other forum on the internet is certainly not the correct medium for you to represent the downside of antidepressant medication in the disproportionate way that you do. Those who are suffering with the symptoms of depression are very vulnerable and their symptoms of paranoia can be exacerbated by manipulative efforts of others.

I find your argument that people should know the facts of anti-depressants poor and inadequate. You are hiding behind this and infer very poorly that others do not have the right to rebuff you.

I asked the list owner about the symptoms you described and she said that this is a normal reaction. Within one to two days, these drugs cause structural alterations to the brain.

Name her. What medical qualifications does she have?

It is entirely possible that this damage will be compounded if they take another drug.

Wholly incorrect. Often withdrawal symptoms which persist can be dealt with by changing the SSRI being taken and then coming off the new anti-depressant. It is more/as probable that these side effects were actually a good sign that the medication was ultimately going to have a positive effect. Whilst there is evidence to suggest that there is an immediate increase in the levels of serotonin in the brain following the commencement of SSRI medication it is not clear that the receptors can deal with this surge.

It is a classic symptom when starting SSRI's to actually feel worse for a while. This varies from individual to individual. But I say again it is a classic symptom. Stopping this kind of medication abruptly can heighten withdrawal symptoms and would not be condoned by any GP.

BTW this is likely to be what the doctor will recommend, unless luck would have it that this particular doctor is more knowledgeable than most about the effects of SSRIs on the body.

I'm just totally lost. If this is your best at rational comment and thought then I don't think you're the greatest advert for your nutritional approach.

There is absolutely no doubt that healthy diet helps everyone, including those who are not depressed. However, the treatment of SAD and depression needs the knowledge of a medical expert. It should not be left to the vagaries of a bulletin board on the internet.

I am not medically qualified. I make no apologies for my outburst. Empowerment is only possible if those trying to do so, do it without prejudice and bias.

How we control SAD is our choice. Let's leave the litany of injustice caused by antidepressants and concentrate on impartial and honest advice that is truly going to give those who want help the opportunity to come to terms with their condition all the help they can get.

Although noone needs medical qualifications to educate themselves about antidepressants, I feel it is wholly inappropriate for a medically unqualified person to spout off in the way that you do. Relating your personal experience with X, Y or Z is one thing, but recommending this, that or the other is a job for a professional. You can't diagnose what is wrong with a person over the internet, so in my opinion you shouldn't be recommending what that person should do either.

I find it hard to understand why, if you don't have SAD, you hang around here.

The professionals are often the ones who make us ill with medication and misdiagnoses. Most doctors accept what they are told about a drug by the company that manufactures it. They are not always the experts we would like to believe they are. You may take this as me being supremely cynical or arrogant in the extreme, depending on your experience with doctors and your own beliefs. I think individuals would be better off taking more responsibility for their own health. I do believe that most doctors are good, caring people; I also believe that some drugs can be life-saving. Overall, though, I also believe that as a society we are over-medicated, and that doctors can often do more harm than good in this respect. David Healy, a British psychiatrist who is often consulted about antidepressants, thinks this too. He would actually like to see most medications available over the counter, with a doctor consulted in more of an advisory capacity, which is similar to how things used to be before the advent of psychopharmacology in the 1950s.

Who do I think I am? I'm trying to help people who come here asking for it in desperation. You're welcome to disagree with what I say. I believed I had SAD for a year and a half, and while I know now this was not the main problem, I do still experience very noticeable fluctuations in depression in the winter, with February and March being the worst months. I also notice that people come here with questions about antidepressants. I will tell them what I know. You can tell them what you know. They can then make up their minds. If you don't like what I am saying I will not pursue arguments in other threads, it is not my intention to get into arguments with people here, but I do want to share the info that I have where it seems appropriate. It seemed appropriate here in this thread.

Linda.

Thanks Linda

I too believe that drugs arent always the answer. As far as coping is concerned I've begun a detox regime and have been trying hard to eat well (I've found it difficult to find good wholesome food since I've moved to this country though, everything seems to be loaded with fat, salt, preservatives and other nasties, and all the healthy stuff seems to be a lot more expensive, its funny the things you take for granted).

I've found that watching the Cricket World Cup has been getting me through the day, must be all the sunshine and calypso music ( Go South Africa !!! :D ), and I try to go for walks along the beach when the weather is good. These things seem to be helping and some days I really feel good.

Thanks everyone for your concern, this site has really helped me out (even when things get a little heated)

Fuzz

The professionals are often the ones who make us ill with medication and misdiagnoses. Most doctors accept what they are told about a drug by the company that manufactures it. They are not always the experts we would like to believe they are.

You just can't help yourself can you Linda, Just let it go and accept that everyone knows your opinions on doctor's GP's etc etc and not everyone agrees with you (heaven forbid).......

If you want to give people advise on how bad AD's are for them, just direct them to your thread, without the arrogant comments. That will aleviate the un-necessary outbursts of frustration from everybody else (including myself) . They can then decide whether they want to continue a disscussion about this with you or not.

In my opinion you do not have a healthy approach to this subject, you are obsessional and are not prepared to accept that not everyone has had the same experiences as you when being on AD's or coming off them. Your experiences coming off them were obviously your own doing because you openly admit to going cold turkey which is something anyone with an once of sense about them would advise you not to do.

Fuzzy...... Because you were only on the AD's for a short period of time I don't think that you will have caused yourself any permanent damage. Try to relax and eat healthily and just give yourself time to recover. I hope the current outburst has not put you off the site. It's not always like this, on the whole people on here do get along very well, have a lot in common and offer good advice and support.

I'd just like to add that I can see how what I've been saying about ADs must sound extreme. Maybe it sounds like I've got a personal agenda fuelled by the resentment of what my drug did to me. I forget sometimes to explain the context from which I am speaking.

I was deep in depression, my medication wasn't helping, nothing was helping. I was Googling one day and came across a website called Prozac Awareness. I told them I was despairing to the point of feeling hopeless and suicidal and asked for help, and they directed me to the Withdrawal and Recovery list. The people on Prozac Awareness are driven with a passion that I had trouble understanding. They actively go on anti-drug protests and hold demonstrations outside courthouses. But I was thankful for their help and went on my way, addressing my individual problems and starting the road to recovery.

On the Withdrawal and Recovery list I came, in time, to understand what drives the people both there and on Prozac Awareness. Here was a world full of the torment these drugs have caused individuals and their friends and families. The things happening to these people are real, though you tend not to hear about them in the mainstream media. They are swept under the carpet.

I've spoken to people who have lost loved ones to suicide. There are people on the lists who have suffered a huge spectrum of damage from the drugs, short-term, long-term, and permanent. The list of symptoms is practically endless. Neurological damage is very common. There's depression, anxiety, sexual dysfunction -- all of which started, or continued, after drug treatment. There are people with dyskinesias and akathesias, which are painful neurological conditions. There's fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, diabetes, memory loss, digestive disorders.

I've spoken to a woman who developed neuralgia in her feet when she tapered off Seroxat. She was a national-class runner and now she can barely walk. She heals a little each day and is one of the most positive people I know. There's a mother who regrets letting her teenage daughter go on Zoloft, which the doctor was happy to allow even though it is contra-indicated for under-18s due to increased suicide risk, and she is awake at night worrying about her daughter's withdrawal symptoms as she slowly tapers off the drug. There are countless other people there who are also tapering and trying to get their lives back.

The damage that doctors have done to many of these people is truly astounding. Some will put people on cocktails of drugs that have never been proven to be safe if taken together. They are allowed to do something called prescribing off label, which means they can administer a drug for virtually any purpose they personally see fit, whether or not the drug has been approved for that use. When people have developed problems after starting a drug, instead of questioning whether the problem is the drug, the doctors have added another drug, or increased the dosage. There was a teenaged girl who was put on Lexapro; her condition rapidly deteriorated, and she was diagnosed as bipolar and put on drugs for that. This is a common practise.

In America there can be huge pressure from the establishment for a person to go on a drug. Doctors can essentially send a child into custody if the parents refuse to administer a drug like Ritalin that has been prescibed, or even just recommended by a guidance counsellor at a school. There is a controversial programme growing in popularity there called Teen Screen, which is a test given in schools that purportedly highlights signs of mental illness such as depression or anxiety disorder. Before they even go home to their parents, children can be put in an office and told they are mentally ill. The sorts of questions the test asks are things like, "Do you feel sad or lonely sometimes?" Any average healthy teenager would probably answer "yes" to such a question. Teen Screen and its ilk are pathologising normal human life experiences and putting more people on the bandwagon of mental illness diagnosis and drugs.

I find it impossible to see the degree of suffering caused by psychotropic drugs and not feel indignant and betrayed by the system that lets this happen and is supposed to protect us from such things. The American FDA is in the pocket of the drug companies and is told by Congress that its duty is to certify new drugs for public use faster than they do. The doctors are largely ignorant of the real dangers of the drugs and some don't even acknowledge that withdrawal is possible; I've spoken to many people who were told their troubles are all in their heads, or that they're still ill and need more meds. Most clinical studies done on drugs are sponsored by the drug companies themselves, and adverse results are concealed in any number of ways; they also know many techniques to get the positive results they want from these trials. The end result of all of this is that when we agree to take these medications, we are not aware of the real risks, nor are most doctors.

I have cited some sources for this info in the Antidepressant Info section here. Again I would ask that anyone who thinks I am a crank, please have a look there and decide for yourself.

Every day new people join the Withdrawal and Recovery list. They are people like Fuzzymonkey who are trying to make sense out of what is happening to them and need help. Some are struggling in terrible ways and have experienced a great deal of damage from the drugs. It touches my heart and again and again I feel outrage at a society that can let this happen.

It is true that not everyone will experience damage from these drugs to this degree. However, there have been no studies done on the long-term effects of psychotropic drugs. Last time I was in America I met an aunt who I discovered had been on ADs for longer than a decade. She is still convinced they are helping her, but she has gained a lot of weight and she is suffering Parkinson-like symptoms to the extent that she can barely hold a fork. Tests for Parkinson's disease have been negative and her doctors don't know what is wrong with her. ADs can cause the sort of symptoms she is experiencing but no one is willing to consider this. It is going to be the fate of my family to watch her condition deteriorate while she continues to take the drug that is making her increasingly ill.

This is where I am coming from when I talk about ADs. I would not tell anyone they are guaranteed that any specific thing will happen if they take a drug, but the real risks need to be known first. They are not even the selective medications for depression that they are touted to be, though this is a separate discussion, and again the info for this can be found in Antidepressant Info.

I came to this thread, wanting to help a perosn using what I have learned about ADs and withdrawal from a year of working with people on the Withdrawal and Recovery list. I do not wish to get into arguments with anyone about why they should or shouldn't take ADs. Like I said, however, I do feel a need to share the truth where appropriate. It is the only way I feel I can bring some justice to the many people who have suffered damage from the drugs, who were betrayed by the system and whose stories will never be told. If governments and doctors are not willing to tell the truth then it is down to ordinary people. It has to start somewhere.

I hope this clarifies where I am coming from. I would be happy to discuss any of the articles, links, and books I have cited in Antidepressant Info.

Linda.

I won't argue Suzie. I'm glad things have turned out well for you. I myself have had less trouble than many others I know and I'm thankful for that too.

Many of the sources I've listed are from the US but not all. Teen Screen isn't here thank goodness, but I've read articles by UK sources praising it and saying it should be introduced here. Also, drugs are not prescribed quite so readily or in the kinds of cocktails that they tend to be in the US, nor is it legal for them to be advertised here (there are TV ads for them over there). I hope we do maintain this more sensible attitude.

I also hope we here can try to understand each other a bit better. I should have thought to explain from the first that I am part of a large community of people who have been harmed by drugs and want the truth about them known; I am not pursuing a personal vendetta, and in fact the experience of taking the drug seems a lot less immediate to me now because it was a year ago and I am used to dealing with the related problems, it is part of life's routine.

I hope it's also clear that my initial posts in this thread were not because of the use of an antidepressant per se, but because this person had experienced suicidal ideation due to them and therefore is at further risk if they try the drugs again. If someone came here and generally stated that they were taking ADs and were not having problems, and were not actively encouraging others to do so, then I can't imagine I would comment on the subject at all. If someone said that ADs are a possible treatment for SAD then this is what everyone hears from doctors etc and I wouldn't comment either. When people say they are having problems though, that's where I feel I can offer some help.

Best wishes for your own taper, you should be fine if you do it slowly.
Linda.

This is true, no one actually knows the details about how the drugs work or what happens when a person is on them long term. There is also a lack of data about how many people experience distressing side effects, withdrawal effects, and permanent damage from them. Yes most drugs have the potential to damage some people. The question then becomes how many people, and is the risk worth it? Do we then allow people to take the drug as long as they know the risks? We may have to wait for time to tell with psychotropic meds.

I think there are some fundamental differences in the way that I and some others here are viewing this, and I don't think we're going to agree on much at this point in time. I'd just like to add to Suzie and the others I have been talking with here that I know you are caring people, that you have obviously had problems of your own, and that you want to support others here just like I do. We're all talking from the same caring hearts. For my part I will avoid any situations where more disagreements like this might arise because I don't think it's done anyone a lot of good. Please just be aware that if someone comes here with questions about meds, I will probably respond if I think I can offer some help.

Linda.

Darrell, if you would like some of the sources of my info, please visit the topic I maintain here called Antidepressant Info. There is a lot more I can add to it but I thought I would let the dust settle from this thread for a while, as I don't wish to agitate people further.

Like I said in my last post here, we fundamentally disagree on a number of points. I am not going to pursuade you and you are not going to pursuade me. It isn't worth arguing about here. If you would like to talk to me about anything I've posted in Antidepressant Info then please do. If not, then live and let live. From now on I will take especial care not to get into arguments like this as it is not what I set out to do here.

Linda.

OK guys, I didn't think we were here to flame each other and this is the last post I want to put here.

I don't maintain Antidepressant Info because I want to argue. It is there for people to look at if they want to. It will possibly give them some new ideas. If anyone is pro-drugs then it is certainly their choice not to read it. I am putting articles, links, book lists etc there and nowhere else, again so that people can choose to read it, or not.

I'm clear on the image of me here as a stupid, clueless, obsessive crank who is rankled by my own experience with a drug and is now out to take over everyone's brain and force them to eat broccoli and flush their antidepressants down the toilet. If that's what you think then fine, let's leave it at that and move on. This isn't getting us anywhere.

Linda.

OK . . . I've been asking for a discussion in Antidepressant Info because that seems a more appropriate place for it than here in this thread. Also you will find there the info which will back up what I have been saying, including the book list you asked for. I would suggest starting with Dr. Peter Breggin, any of his books, or the articles on his website.

I'm not keen to argue because I don't think I'm going to persuade you of anything. There are a lot of publications out there written by the pharmaceuticals, or ghost-written by people paid by them; there are studies that have been published that have manipulated statistics; there are websites with connections to big pharma that hide this fact and propagate pro-drug propaganda. There are stories to be found written by people who feel their drugs have helped them, and by doctors who feel the drugs have helped their patients. You could find any of these and tell me it shows that what I am saying is not true, or that it balances the picture. You could likewise dismiss the info I have posted myself as propaganda. If anyone were determined to disagree with me then I can't think of anything else I could say to pursuade. That topic is there for anyone who wants to learn more about meds and is more open-minded to the possibility that they are more dangerous than is generally believed, and perhaps are looking for an alternative approach to dealing with depression.

I'm sorry if you don't like my approach of suggesting people read Antidepressant Info and Nutrition Info. Surely they are free to make this decision though, and if they feel as you do, they don't need to look in the topics. It is my view that this info could help. I don't understand why you seem so hostile to the idea that nutrition could help depression. If you look in the topic you will see the story of a woman who was self-harming. Typically she would be put on a psychotropic drug, but she saw an orthomolecular doctor who diagnosed a nutritional deficiency and was able to rectify it, and she was fine. There's a lot of evidence elsewhere that nutrition can help with a variety of mental and physical illnesses. There are a lot of toxins in our environment as well, and toxins we ingest, that harm us. These can often be the root causes of illnesses that would otherwise be treated with drugs.

You say that Antidepressant info is biased against drugs. I suppose I would say it is anti-drugs. I believe that psychotropic drugs are harmful. I am indeed aware that many people feel they have been helped by the drugs, even that they have been life-saving. Psychotropic drugs are not the selective treatments for depression, schizophrenia, etc that they are touted to be, and taking them gives an artificial surge of a neurotransmitter which can produce elevated mood or a high in some people, just like other drugs can do, legal or illegal. The question then becomes whether it is ethical to prescribe such a "treatment." Because these drugs are harmful to the body and are capable of inflicting permanent damage, I would personally say no. I speak as someone who has experienced the pain of depression, sometimes deep depression, for two and a half years and have often wished for relief while I have worked long-term on changing my life circumstances. We are all programmed to seek pleasure and avoid pain; and particularly when depression is disabling and our lives are falling apart, I can understand why someone would reach for a drug. The right support systems to give help need to be there, including doctors who ask questions about people's lives and diets, and can offer a variety of kinds of counselling.

I know this must sound like a shocking and arrogant attitude to people who have never had cause to distrust their doctors, who have taken meds and feel they've been helped by them, who don't hear anything in the media about the suffering that psychotropic drugs cause. The phamaceuticals cover it up all the time. They are in the middle of a messy lawsuit right now about a neuroleptic drug called zyprexa; they are being sued by a group of people who developed diabetes on the drug, and it has emerged that the company's own clinical trials showed that the drug has a significant chance of causing the disease, but they locked the info away in their files -- which they are allowed to do because they can store their clinical data under a confidentiality clause called "trade secrets." There is talk that this law needs changing.

The bare bones of my beliefs are these. I believe that at their most benign antidepressants cover up the symptoms of depression, and at their most dangerous they wreck lives. I'm aware that most people would see this as radical. I am putting what I know and what I am learning into Antidepressant Info and try for the most part to keep it there. I do not go around the forum telling people to stop taking their drugs. However if someone comes here saying that they have deep depression, I will try to help them with drug-free approaches to the problem. And I may sugggest to people that they read my topics. If there are a lot of people here who really don't like hearing my voice then I can appreciate that and I will be more judicious in what I reply to.

I think it just needs to be said again that if I see someone whose drug made them feel suicidal and who may decide to take another drug, I feel concerned about that person's life and will talk to them. SSRIs are very similar to each other and if one causes suicidal ideation, it is a distinct possibility that another will too. Maybe not -- but I feel it would be irresponsible to ask the person to take that risk. That is why I spoke up here.

Several months back there was a person posting on this list who had been taking an SSRI. His doctor had switched him abruptly to bupropion and when he complained of feeling worse, his doctor increased the dosage. He came here saying he was starting to feel suicidal. What was happening was that SSRIs and bupropion are not compatible, they work on different neurotransmitters. His body was in SSRI withdrawal, and it is possible that he was also having an adverse reaction to the bupropion. I asked him if he would consider stopping the bupropion, or at least dropping the dose back down. He told me that the last thing he needed at that time was to reduce his meds, that he needed them. We haven't heard from him since, though I do still hope he will come back at one point and let us know that he's OK. A doctor should know that switching an SSRI for bupropion is essentially taking someone off their SSRI cold turkey, but instead of considering this option, the doctor in this case increased the dose of bupropion. This is actually a common occurrence, where doctors treat iatrogenic (drug-induced) symptoms with more drugs instead of considering that it is the actual drugs that may be the problem.

If you want to carry on with this discussion then I am OK with that but let's do it in Antidepressant Info and let Fuzzymonkey get a break. At some point soon I'll add more of the articles, links etc that I've been filing to put there. I recommend the Street Spirit article (Psychiatric Drugs: An Assault on the Human Condition) as a starting point, though you're welcome to discuss what you want there.

Linda.

Peter Breggin is a controversial figure. Many people in the high echelons of government and medicine do not subscribe to what he says. They do not subscribe to anyone who criticises mainstream drugs and big pharma. Some people listen, some don't. He has had mixed success in the courts. Some people credit him with raising a great deal of awareness about the dangers of drugs, some people think what he says is nonsense. I think his books speak for themselves.

Depending on where you look, you can find info that praises him or rubbishes him. Here is an excerpt from Wikipedia.

"The New York Times has labeled Breggin as the nation's best-known ADHD critic. As early as 1991 he coined the acronym DADD, stating, "...most so-called ADHD children are not receiving sufficient attention from their fathers who are separated from the family, too preoccupied with work and other things, or otherwise impaired in their ability to parent. In many cases the appropriate diagnosis is Dad Attention Deficit Disorder (DADD)". Breggin his written two books specifically on the topic entitled, Talking Back to Ritalin and The Ritalin Factbook. In these books he has made some controversial claims such as, "Ritalin "works" by producing malfunctions in the brain rather than by improving brain function. This is the only way it works". Forbes credited Breggin with "almost single-handedly reenergizing the anti-Ritalin contingent", which lead to a "flurry of lawsuits and news stories".Breggin also testified to Congress with Fred Baughman. In Congress Breggin claimed "that there were no scientific studies validating ADHD, that all these kids needed was "discipline and better instruction", and that therapeutic stimulants "are the most addictive drugs known in medicine today". PBS Frontline also did a five part TV series entitled Medicating Kids which was specifically about ADHD. Fred Baughman and Breggin were the major critics used in this series. In an interview during this time period he referred to ADHD as a "fiction". This increased critical attention to Ritalin culminated with the Ritalin class action lawsuits against Novartis, the American Psychiatric Association (APA), and CHADD in which the Plaintiffs sued for fraud. Specifically, they charged that the defendants had conspired to invent and promote the disorder ADHD to create a highly profitable market for the drug Ritalin. At the time, these cases were considered "the next tobacco" and garnered national media attention. Breggin was the medical consultant for several of the class action lawsuits. All five lawsuits were dismissed or withdrawn before they went to trial."

Stephen Barrett's Quackwatch site had a definite agenda. It sets out to rubbish practitioners of alternative medicine. He has made many, often unsuccessful, attempts to sue alternative practitioners. The site has received funding from big pharma, who have a definite interest in persuading people that alternative medicine is nonsense and that the only way forward is to trust conventional doctors and mainstream medicine. Barrett folded his psychiatric practice after he failed to attract enough clients to maintain himself. Almost anything "alternative" you care to look up at his site, be it dental amalgams or herbal medicine, is rubbished. This is an example of the sort of thing it's easy to go and find if you want to argue against what I'm saying. Before you read what any site says, it's important to find out who has written it, why, and where the funding has come from.

If you feel you've seen reason enough to dismiss Breggin as someone who is lacking qualifications and therefore must not know what he is talking about, that's fine. It's your choice whether you read him or not.

Linda.

Love the website name www.quackwatch etc

So descriptive..

I note that you use Wikepedia as a source, Linda. As I understand it, anyone can write anything about anything there. I tend to warn my kids to be objective when using it as source material for assignments.

What I'm saying is not informed and true? Have you been to the Antidepressant topic to look? All of the info there is sourced.

I've explained why I haven't posted info there that is pro-drugs. If you think about the point of view from which I am operating, then whether you agree or not, you will see why I don't see the logic in posting anything about how these drugs help people. I've said many times now that I recognise that people feel they have been helped by them, that they feel better, feel they've been able to get their lives back. Why, taking that into consideration, would I still believe that the drugs are harmful? The Antidepressant Info topic explains why. I hope the information there speaks for itself. I've asked many times that people who don't like what I am saying, go there and see where I am actually coming from. I don't think anyone can deny that there are many people who have been harmed by the drugs, even caused to commit suicide or murder. There has been a lot of suffering. These aren't a bunch of lies. One of the first things I asked when I started discovering this info myself was, why was I never told? Why isn't this information public knowledge?

I appreciate the stance of people who feel they have befitted from the drugs. I am not going to attack you for that here, it is your choice to take them. If you write to me in Antidepressant Info as some of you have done then I will be candid about my views there. In this thread I hadn't intended to get into a pro and anti drugs discussion but that seems to be what happened. Also, as I said earlier, I don't think anyone here is going to convince anyone else, so how much energy and time are we going to spend on this?

Darrell, who is right about Quackwatch? You decide. I'm aware that he denies he's had funding from drug companies. He is lying. He has made a lot of money from the pharmaceutical and chemical industries. Also he was de-licensed in the 1990s, and is not a Medical Board Certified psychiatrist because he failed the certification exam. As well as these facts, he has also been forced to concede in a court case that he has ties to the AMA, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Food & Drug Administration (FDA). He's not going to put any of this on his website.

I mentioned Wikipedia because it was one of the first things I Googled. There's a lot of info about Peter Breggin around. However, I don't think anyone here is actually interested in reading his books. No one seems to want to look at the actual info I've put into the antidepressant topic. Instead it is dismissed out of hand as obsessive nonsense. I can understand this if it is coming from someone who is worried that some of it might be true, and what the implications are. If you truly want to engage me then discuss what I've presented. You're happy to rubbish Peter Breggin but you will not look at what he actually says.

Do I get funding? No. I have no ties to big pharma. If someone does then it should be obvious that what they are saying is going to serve their interests.

Do I think there is a lack of complete information in what I have presented? Yes, there's never enough of it.

What is my agenda? I want to help people. I do not want to see suffering and death caused by drugs.

I repeat, none of us here is going to convince anyone else. All this energy could be put to use in helping support others on the list.

Linda.

Thanks Darrell for taking the time and effort to post the other side of the argument. As I have said before, all information posted needs to be objective and balanced so that vulnerable people like myself and many others on here get all of the facts and can make a proper informed decision on how they are going to help themselves and deal with their illness.

Bless you, your a star.

I can totally relate to what you are saying. I also have had the relationship and employment problems and for years didn't know what the hell was going on. My GP had diagnosed reaccurrent depression but we hadn't noticed the seasonal changes

In 2006 I had a particularly bad year and had a breakdown. I didn't go out for 3 months. This was when I started to peice things together. I had been keeping a diary for many years and looked back through them all. This was when I noticed that whenever I changed my job it was always in February, I have been divorced twice, both occured in January. I hated my birthday's and spent best part of them arguing with my then husband and not even opening my cards (my birthday is 29th Dec). This wasn't just a coincidence.

This is when I took my life back, I took control of this awful illness that was causing me so much unhappiness and distress, and I have never looked back. I don't see my life through rose tinted glassed but I am content with my lot.

These are the experiences that new people with SAD need to be aware of. That having SAD is not the end of their life, just the begining of a new one.

hi darrell, and thankyou for puttiing the other side of the argument, I think its important to note that although medication doesnt suit everybody, there are a great number of people suffering from one kind of deppression or another, including myself who have benefited greatly from such medication. Thanks again for your posts.

Hi Paul,

Thank you for taking the time to "chat" with me. I am grateful for your candour and effort.

Can I be really trite please.

You'll need to bear with me.

Imagine you run your own company and need to recruit a new member of your team.

You have only two candidates to interview. They are twins. They currently earn the same salary and hold the same job working for the same company. They are married to twins and live in the opposite sides of the same semi-detached homes. Both have the same qualifications. They both have a degree in engineering. It's a 1st class with honours. Only one difference separates the two candidates. One was schooled at Eaton and one at Hull University.

So my question is this. Your the boss ... who gets the job and why?

.... think about if for a while before scrolling down please

















Scroll down a little further please :P







The person who gets the job is the person who schooled at Hull University. That person achieved the same educational qualifications from a "lesser" institute.

Apologies for being trite .... only a small number of us can expect to be educated at Eaton. The rest of us have to make do with Hull University.

Life's hard ...