"this article comes to us from britain"

oh my bad, nm nothing to see here move on!

I've heard of other stories where the suicide victims or murder perps do something weird with their medication just before they commit the act in question. I think there are a few examples on ssristories.com in fact. To me it demonstrates that at some level these guys know the meds are messing with their minds.

well this has me speechless, i feel sorry for the guy and the burning of the meds can equate to how they weren't doing their efficacious duty.
sad situation all the way around.

Starting fires is so 1980s, beyond that I don't see the problem. We set things on fire we were rid of all the time, those goddess circles I used to belong to, it's about as ceremonial as you can get.

Philip,
You have always had a way with words.....

"On one level, it sounds funny, but on another it doesn't sound funny at all."

I actually started laughing when I read the title of your article and realized the obivous psychosis when I read on. Good post!!!

As far as ssristories.com is concern I was ask myself where are the relatives or friends of all these people?
Where is Traci Johnson's parents? She was 19 years old when she hanged herself on Eli-Lilly's facilities. The names of the other 4 people who also committed suicide in Cymbalta's trial are not even known.
Perhaps they receive money and support from the labs and all the mafia.

ana, i can tell you that i suspect that traci's parents were given a very quiet legal settlement by lilly and told to shut up. i've never heard from them and no one has. i've heard from other friends and cousins of hers. it's like with the zyprexa victims and their families...lilly pays them a small amount of money and they shut up.

Dear Philip,
I had the suspicion but knowing that it's true it hurts.
I don't know about Zyprexa victims.
I've been on this drug and woke up in the middle of the night in the living-room making a speech I don't remember what was the contempt. Phoned the psychiatrist "-It's all right. It will go away." Second night: another speech. He changed the medication.
Am I bipolar? No.
Am I depressed? No.
I just had a nervous breakdown and was prescribed clonazepam and therapy.
Went to therapy and was lucky to find the right person.
Some years later I went to a psychiatrist in search for help to get out of clonazepam.
To make a long story short: was prescribed the first antidepressant... became a psychiatrist patient because they understood side effects as symptoms of disease.
Now, after studying and searching a lot for a book and to heal myself, I can see clearly what has happened.
But for psychiatrist I became bipolar, depressed... no matter what!
I'm on Seroquel because I cannot stand the withdrawal. I'm on Efexor after trying 2 years tapering 225 mg - went to hell and had all the withdrawal symptoms of David Healy's Protocol - suicidal thoughts included and I can assure you that it has nothing to do with real suicidal thought, I mean, wanting to take your life for a reason.
Finally got off. After 3 months out of Effexor I could not even walk. I felt terrible in such a way that I cannot explain.
I had to go back to Efexor and will have to take it for the rest of my life.
And... I also take 2 mg of clonazepam.
Another story. Just another story.

Judge Nicholas Woodward should have done his homework and should have read this:
"The Influence of Pharmaceutical Industry" march-2005
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmhealth/42/42.pdf

"5.Problems with Seroxat and other SSRIs
Prozac and Seroxat are the best-known examples of SSRI and related antidepressants, but others are widely used.The introduction of SSRIs led to a threefold increase in antidepressant prescriptions between 1990 and 2000. Prescriptions for antidepressants now match those of the benzodiazepine tranquillisers at their peak, 25 years ago.
Almost from the outset, there was concern about two main problems with SSRIs. First, there was suspicion (initially centred on Prozac) that these drugs could induce suicidal and violent behaviour – infrequently, but independently of the suicidal thoughts that are linked to depression itself.There was also concern (centred on Seroxat) about a risk of dependence; some users found it impossible to stop taking SSRIs because of severe withdrawal symptoms. The MCA/CSM formally reviewed these problems on several occasions.The suicidality problem was first investigated in 1990/1; withdrawal reactions were investigated in 1993,
1996 and 1998.In 2002,the MCA organised a further intensive review of both problems. This review was abandoned in April 2003, following criticism about conflicts of interest involving key figures on the review team. "p. 87
They know it all it is well documented.
But according to the same UK Parliament review:
"2.The drugs are produced by a very large and successful industry. It employs 83,000 people directly and many more indirectly,and makes a huge contribution to the balance of trade each year. Overall,the industry represents the country ’s third most profitable economic activity, after tourism and finance. It is of great importance to the UK economy."

Ana Lima, Thank you for sharing some of your story. I'm very sorry you are suffering so much from the consequences of the drugs. I don't think you should give up on trying to get off (if you want to) just because you have had problems so far in your efforts. Do look at Bipolar Blast (link on the right on Philip's blog) and maybe get a copy of The Antidepressant Solution by Joseph Glenmullen. I hope things look up for you. I'm sure it's hard to find help in Brazil.

Sara,
Thanks for your support and concern. I'm 49 years old and have been using and getting off of these drugs for the last decade. Now I'm feeling fine. If I was going to start tapering again I would not function for at least 5 years and still I would have the permanent harms and "chemical imbalance" these drugs promote.
So it's better keep on having them so I can live.
I'm looking forward to read Joseph Glenmullen "The Antidepressants Facts". When I was tapering Effexor the only help I got was on "socialaudit" discussion board. There was a man who was already out of SSRI and helped people and used to quote this book. I would like to translate it into Portuguese. We don't have any of the literature that explain the harms and it would be of great help for many people don't speak english and don't have access even to what is on the Web.
I just cannot buy it online for I lost my bank account and Mastercard. :-) I had to buy the antidepressant while tapering and was not working. Don't care too much about me. I'm fine. When I read some testimonies I consider myself lucky for some people have some side effects that I don't have. Some people have lost their ability to use the language and have difficulties finding words on dictionary or even writing fluently. That would be a tragedy for me. Another tragedy would be loosing my sense of humour. Cannot live without it. I have visited Bipolar Blast. :)

"If the defense attorney is correct about what's gone on with this man, then I'd say jail isn't what this fellow needs at all."

Philip: Just to be sure, are you implying that what the fellow needs instead is coercive psychiatry?

ted, just to be clear, why do you think i am implying that?

You know, as in "don't send the poor lad to prison, get him the help he needs." Perhaps it just reads that way, so do correct me if I am wrong. Another reason for asking if that is your implication, from a brief look at your site, is that you have strong words against both Scientology and Thomas Szasz, who both reject coercive psychiatry (for different reasons, perhaps). A final reason is that you identify yourself as "mentally ill" ("and have interviewed hundreds of people with mental illness"), thus potentially lending credibility to the validity of the concept as a genuine medical disease. Hence, if there is a disease, there can be a treatment which the young man from the UK has a need for, etc etc.

Just curious really..

well ted i have strong criticisms of szasz and scientology, although i think they are right abotu some things. as for the fellow in this story i don't know enough about his case to say what would be suitable and helpful for him--he sounds like a possible ptsd case from the hostage thing he was involved in, but that's as far as i can get. it just strikes me that jail isn't a particular useful place for this fellow, and he hardly strikes me as someone who'd be much of a threat to society.

i'm not anti-psychiatry or pro-psychiatry ted. i'm kind of in the middle. as for terms like mental illness, i use it from time to time although i tend to stick with disorder more. i rarely use the term disease. and so on.

What strikes me about this story is of course this, anti depressant pills are flammable. Again I must ask, what is prozac made of (and all the others too)? We know what lithium is made of, we know what aspirin is made of, but prozac? What exactly is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor? Sheep boogers, unlikely as they probably don't burn. Mesquite sap, unlikely, donkey hooves? Milkweed? Anyone know?

Philip:
Thanks for the response. I would be interested to learn what your criticisms of Szasz are.
As for the story, I must ask if you are of the opinion that prison/psychiatric services/whatever should be allocated on the basis of a) what the person potentially receiving them needs, b) what is useful (to the person/others), c) what future consequences the allocation might or might not have? From what you have written so far, it seems that all three may play a role. Do you think there are any important differences between them?

Lastly, stating that you are neither pro- nor anti-psychiatry leaves me wondering what you mean. For instance, as you are no doubt aware, Laing is perhaps the most famous anti-psychiatrist, but shared ever so much in common with the psychiatric establishment. I would want to rephrase the question as follows: Where do you stand in terms of psychiatry and the harm and/or good it does to people? (To be sure, let us define psychiatry as that which is presently practised by the government.)

Ted.

Ted,
Why do you say Laing is "the most famous antipychiatrist"? Search his name at Wikipedia for and you'll know a little bit of his work.
If you read his books "The Divided Self", "Self and Others" and others perhaps you'll find all his effort in making some sense on mental diseases.
If you search a little you can find the answer for your question:
"Where do you stand in terms of psychiatry and the harm and/or good it does to people?"
I have no doubt that you're teasing.
I'm sick of hearing the same kind of critics towards people who are telling their experience with side effects and all the problems that psychiatry drugs are bringing.
"-I lost a kidney for the drugs!"
"-Nonsense! You are a Scientologist." "-I'm 20 years old and have no sexual drive. I will never have a child." "-Nonsense! You are antipsychiatrist!" Enough is enough.

Ana,
What makes you think I haven't read Laing's books? I suggested that Laing is perhaps the most famous anti-psychiatrist because he was, and still is, very well known in many circles.

I ask for confirmation because I am genuinely not sure what to make of Philip's response, i.e. he is neither pro- nor anti-psychiatry. Perhaps you can inform me of what this means in concrete terms, or direct me to the answers?

I am not teasing. I don't quite understand the last part of your message, but it is certainly not my intention to diminish or devalue the suffering of anyone who has been unfortunate enough to have had unwanted psychiatric experiences. After all, I can only speak for myself, and my own experiences. From what I can make out, this blog is written with considerable effort and is genuinely informative. Is it too much to ask to want to know what the author thinks of existing mental health laws, mental health law in theory, and so on? And I may be wrong, but I would have thought that other newcomers would be interested too.

Sincerely,
Ted.

Like Phillip, I am neither pro or anti-psychiatry. It's a much more nuanced issue (like most things) than the "it's all poison!" or Big Pharma approaches. Antidepressants, antipsychotics, anxiolytics, you name it, are definitely overprescribed. However, that does not mean they do not have their own merit for some individuals. When people get sick, not everyone needs an antibiotic. Some do.

I have bipolar disorder and I know from my own experience that I would be lost without lithium. I'm not being coerced (my psychiatrist hates the pharma companies just as much as anyone else), that's just the way it is. Just because you had a bad experience doesn't mean it's wrong for everyone, just because it's positive for doesn't mean that it's for everyone.

Anne,
I couldn't be sure, but I will assume your message is directed at me.

"Just because you had a bad experience doesn't mean it's wrong for everyone, just because it's positive for doesn't mean that it's for everyone."
I haven't had any bad experiences. But neither would it matter if I had. My concern is not about whether ingesting certain substances or talking with another person is generally or specifically a good thing (as defined by the client).

I previously asked Philip "Where do you stand in terms of psychiatry and the harm and/or good it does to people? (To be sure, let us define psychiatry as that which is presently practised by the government.)"
The issue is not about psychiatry per se, but coercion. On this particular point, one can reject any and all psychiatric coercion, or not. Both Szasz and Scientologists (to my knowledge) reject all psychiatric coercion. I am still unsure if Philip or anyone else shares this position. (of course, one can still reject Szasz's view that the term mental illness is a category mistake while denying the legitimacy of psychiatric coercion).

I would be quite happy if this blog was more concerned with other matters, but I did hope for some confirmation.

On a related note, I wonder how people on this blog define 'psychiatry'?

At least he didn't dump the meds in the water supply.