Furious Seasons

May 01, 2007

05-01-2007 Media Madness

Hi. Happy May Day. Oodles of interesting stuff out there.

Virginia's governor closes loophole that allowed Cho to buy guns.

Psych Central raises questions about the slippery slope that lawmakers may be on with regards to people deemed to be mentally ill. You take away someone's Second Amendment rights today and what's next tomorrow? And is psych hospitalization--which can result from overwork and exhaustion in milder cases annd can also be as a result of med-induced mania--the appropriate test for withholding Constitutional rights? Given that police officers can force a short-term commitment of anyone they consider acting out-of-bounds, then how long will it be before we hear of a cop using commitment powers in order to fuck with someone they don't like? How long before the federal government uses it to deny rights to political activists (a la ye olde Soviet Union)?

In Washington State, a right-to-carry and shall-issue state, we have a law that precludes anyone who's been in a psych unit from buying a gun, but it allows that right to be restored later by a judge. It's still a fairly new law here, but seems like a decent tradeoff of protections and rights.

Pharmalot has a great item on how much money Lilly hands out in grants to, among others, NAMI. It gave NAMI $544,000 in the first quarter of the year. In recent years, NAMI has clocked about $6 million a year in "grants" from Big Pharma, roughly half of the group's total revenues.

Several fabulous items from CL Psych. An amazing post on researchers pimpin' for Paxil/Seroxat. Lilly is apparently going to go after Zyprexa document leaker David Egilman big time. Punster Pharma Giles is calling it quits. NO!!!!!

The always-excellent Health Care Renewal on the fog around Lilly's hyperglycemia data regarding Zyprexa.

The fine folks at TAC wrap up media coverage--if you can call it that--of the Virginia Tech tragedy and a failed mental health system. Fuller Torrey says basically that the mentally ill don't have civil rights. BTW, how is it that the mental health system in Virginia failed when Cho had only one contact with the system and presented with only "flat affect?" How the hell is a system supposed to tease out a character like that? I ask that in as innocent a manner as possible.

A trial of Seroquel used to treat insomnia in recovering alcoholics. The target dose is 400 mgs a day, so I'll just go out on a limb here: These folks will definitely sleep. Bet they have bad dreams though. Bet the study doesn't measure that.

An interesting piece on Zyprexa lawsuits and docs outraged at medicating kiddos.

The editor of Current Psychiatry calls for limits on product liability for manufacturers of psych meds, among other things, as a way to spur research innovation. I'm not sure I buy the connection, especially since the companies have liability insurance and the real innovation needed is in drug safety. Given said editor's publishing record, I'd say he should be a bit more concerned about product safety.

Posted by Philip Dawdy at May 1, 2007 10:41 AM

del.icio.us Digg it reddit

Comments

Hey Furious...

As far as cops being able to detain someone, don't the attending phycicians have the right to refuse? I suppose they don't. Maybe it should be left in the hands of the physician at the ER instead, because you brought up an excellent point about our Constitutional Rights.

Ahh...Seroquel. Yes, 400mgs would put anyone out for the night. I bet they do *not* have bad dreams because they'll be SO soundly asleep they won't remember them (if they have them). But giving someone such a powerful drug for simple incomnia seems unfathomable to me. An anti-psychotic for insomnia??? Wait until they gain 50 pounds in a matter of months, and they'll be happy to go back to insomnia.

Posted by: KansasSunflower at May 1, 2007 11:43 AM

ah sunflower, they've been handing out seroquel as a sleeping pill on the west coast for several years. each state is a bit different on commitment mechanisms. here the call is made by a cdmhp--county designated mental health professional--not a doc, but cops can basically get someone committed too or committed to the psych unit at jail.

Posted by: Philip Dawdy at May 1, 2007 12:40 PM

I've met several MHP teams, and it's pretty hard to be ITA [involuntary] in Wa. State unless, a person is able to be [with witness account(s)]deemed a danger to self or others.Then the witness is court ordered to show up to MH court to testify against the person for detainment, unless the person signs an agreement for 14 days.It's a complex process, and one not many people have experienced. Patients have rights, and are appointed free attorneys, but if there is a family member, or friend willing to testify to keep them locked up; then they as well as the psych and most importantly the hospital psychologist, will testify against that person.I never had to testify the hospital always had a person go in and do that.That is also how 90 day committments work. Once in that loop, a psych can keep restating the person is not stable and order another 90 days. This is why so many patients never leave the State hospital. No one is there to advocate for them, from my observations. As far as the gun ownership, I thought it was only if one was ITA in WA. that was removed.[I have my daughter's papers, stating that she by law had to give up any firearm, permit to own, upon discharge, and if it was deemed to be reinstated, then not only does one appear before the mental health Judge; there is criteria that makes it look nearly impossible to gain that right back.]

-Seroquel--I was prescribed that for insomnia. Had the nightmares, and not much sleep. I no longer use it, and have never slept better.

Posted by: Stephany at May 1, 2007 05:00 PM