The paper showing efficacy was published after July 27, 2006, which might account for why it was rejected at that date. The whole story may not be out yet, but the information that is available suggests that, at the very least, it doesn't have the discontinuation syndrome and sexual side effects of SSRIs. The one downside is that, as the anonymous psych doc points out, we don't yet know if it will precipitate a polarity switch.

I don't really understand your negativity toward this drug. It will provide an alternative to SSRIs, and it may turn out to be much safer. Additional pre-market studies might be able tell us more about possible side effects, but from what's available, they seem much milder than those of SSRIs.

From the psych at The Corpus Callosum that you link to:

The reason to be cautious, is that it is common for drugs to be released with great fanfare, often with unrealistic expectations about lack of particular adverse effects. The thing is, you never really know about the incidence of adverse effects until the drug has been given to tens of thousands, if not millions, of persons.

Which is what I was thinking about. I wouldn't dare get excited about a drug that is new to market and I think it takes a hell of a lot longer than a year to know if they are safe. It's been more than two decades and there are still asshats that claim SSRI's and atypicals are safe---certainly in contrast to the GREAT risk of depression and psychosis (or anxiety, or irritability---whatever off-label indication you've been given any given drug for)

No, I won't trust big pharma to come out with ANY drug I'm willing to take. I'm waiting for studies done on safe non-toxic substances that I'm already treating myself with just so I can prove that they actually working and spread the good news. Mother nature as pharmacy---all we can do now is experiment based on lots of anecdotes. We've got to move money around and start studying safe natural medicine so that it gains the credibility it deserves.

Just because it's natural doesn't mean it's safe. Ephedra, belladona, and reserpine, a component of Indian snakeroot, are all natural products with the same kinds of negative side effects as many psych meds. Natural remedies have existed for thousands of years, but, ultimately, clinical studies will tell us no more about their safety than they tell us about the safety of novel synthetic antidepressants and antipsychotics.

I certainly didn't suggest all things natural are safe, now did I?

that message got away from me...
In any case, no not all things natural are safe, but there are far more reports of pharmaceuticals being unsafe than any of the nutrients I choose to use. One must be educated and careful in any case. I can say I suffer no side effects from any of the nutrients I use. Nothing adverse. That's not to say I haven't had an adverse reaction to something natural, I have and I discontinued it immediately, something my psychiatrist never suggested I do when I became grossly impaired on psych meds.

When I read this entry, all I saw were the words "off-label" and "anxiety"; due to a PCP/General Practioner doc rx me Prozac and Zyprexa in 2003 for "anxiety".

This is a dangerous thought process for professionals who write prescriptions for a living.