I don't think I can bear to listen to it today. Maybe tomorrow.

It is because SSRI-suicidality/homicide is so buried by the mainstream media that I have decided to go on a campaign of my own about it. Yesterday, I called the Vermont state police after reading about a distraught mother who drown herself and her daughter in a rushing stream. I have no idea whether the authorities will take any action to investigate the drug possibility but hope to find out from Karen Barthe Menzies which type of toxicology study is most effective in determining drugs as a causal factor. So the next time I read something like this, I will have the information handy when I make the phone call.

Hello Mr. Dawdy, I'm a huge huge fan of your blog and your work. Really proud and enthused by what you're doing here.

Interesting, I worked in the office of the chairman of psychiatry at a prestigious hospital/university for about 6 months last year. And there was a lot of outrage over the black box warning on anti-depressants. Most every psychiatrist I spoke to there had the same reaction as the pharma preacher you refer to in this post - "how dare they sully our wonder drug, we're trying to save lives here."

The irony is too thick to see through. The current theory of SSRI treatment for depression (or any other pharma-created condition they try to cross-market it with) is as shallow and barbaric as ice pick lobotomies and blood letting.

I thought I would also share with you my experience briefly working at a clinical trial organization that was testing Meridia.

Meridia was an SSRI that was initially brought to market to treat depression. But there were too many anti-deps on the market already, and it wasn't selling. So the assholes at the drug company looked at the case report forms to find other data trends. "hey, people lost weight rather consistently, let's make it a weight loss drug!" Cue Monica Lewinsky as spokesperson, and we have a new weight loss "medicine" on the horizon.

I literally entered the data of the case report forms for its new studies as a weight loss drug.
I'm sure I could have gotten in trouble for this, but I had to write it down for myself - these were the physician's words about one patient on the drug, verbatim:

"patient reports wanting to kill someone, no one in particular, but is having homicidal rage."

It is just a matter of time before the danger of these drugs are exposed, I commend you for expediting that process. CHEERS!

I was never one to believe in Conspiracy Theories.
However, I changed my mind when the annoucement was placed in practically every newspaper in the country that, since the Black Box warning on antidepressants and suicidality in youth, the suicide rate among youth had gone up as the antidepressant use among youth declined.

In fact, I was so outraged that I have four articles on www.SSRIstories.com that show the rate of antidepressant use did not decline - at least not until 2005 [and then the suicide rate among youth went down]. To find these articles, go to the Index of www.SSRIstories.com and click on the "What" column. Then scroll down to the "C's" for "Crimes Against Humanity." The full media article is available for all four of these articles which give the stats of antidepressant use still increasing until March of 2004 and then being flat until Feb. 2005. Also, scroll further down to the "S's" to "Suicide Rates Decline" to read the article from , believe it or not, the American Journal of Psychiatry which states that the suicide rates among youth declined for 2005.

I think the conspiracy involves the pharma companies more than it does the doctors, though. I think the psychiatrists wanted to be "real doctors" so, in the 1950's when the first antipsychotics were introduced, they jumped on them as their chance to be Grown Up - like a real doctor.

Of course, with the placebo effect being 40% on the antidepressants, then the 60% who are helped is really only 20% but the docs think "Hey, over half of my patients are helped" This is another reason they defend the drugs. So what if the other 40% are not helped but instead become suicidal or homicidal. That is not their problem.

As we found out from the Effexor Rep who Told All, the 20% might be even a little shakey. I reviewed Thorazine on the Cochoran reviews because it is the oldest drug still in use. It has over a 50 year history. Their conclusion, after studying all the records for 50 years, was that Thorazine helps [shows Global Improvement] in one out of seven patients. This is between 14% & 15% then. So it is not even 20%. I am sure this is what the antidepressants are also - 14 l/2% -- or one out of 7 with Global Improvement. What about the other 6 [the 6 out of 7]. What has happened to them besides their becoming obese? Yes, the antidepressants make people fat if they stay on them long enough. Now that the atypical antipsychotics are being advertised for depression, the obesity is going to go through the roof.

I have no sympathy for those who want to make money off the deaths of our children or who want to increase their "prestige" with our children's lives. Also, the study in Manitoba was another example of the Conspiracy Theory. Manitoba was an anomaly - that is why it was used. Look at the stats from the U.K. They show a decline in youth suicide with the recent decline in antidepressant use among youth. I wonder what the other provinces in Canada show. Bet we will never know. Only Manitoba will we know - now if all of this is not a Conspiracy Theory then I don't know what is.

thanks for all your comments. just to clarify one point in a comment, we don't know if the youth suicide rate went down from 2004 to 2005 because the cdc hasn't broken out the age range numbers yet. what we do know is that the overall suicide rate went down in 2005, according to preliminary cdc data released last september. and yes anti-dep rxs went down in 2005 slightly. certainly not the 17 percent goodwin claims on the show. but anti-dep rxs are back up in 06 and 07.

Yes, me too, I don't want to feel like a conspiracy theorist at all but when you read the background, the tactics and partnerships that went into the market expansion for the antipsychotics there is no other way to see it but evil-minded corruption by conspiratorial interests. I run from some of the things I've learned, which is one reason I so appreciate this blog and its contributing activists.

Guy I knew in college had his evidence of suicidality in kids who take anti-depressants supressed by the FDA, he works(ed?) there as a child psychiatrist and drug researcher. That's not conspiracy theory, that's SOP for the FDA and the APA now in my opinion.
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/329/7461/307?ehom&eaf

it's why i call it "riding the axis of evil"; for me that sounds pretty harsh but it's the damn truth. goodwin has said other things that bothered me at times where i questioned his motives, or base of his thought, where it's based at is where the money and the handful of influential "leaders" in this shit.
Re: repackaging of meds that didn't bring in the cash the first time is a prime example of how twisted this is, without concern for patient lives at all.
Straterra is one example where it didn't get used as wanted for childhood bipolar, now it's pushed for adult ADHD; same goes for the weight loss drug Alli(sp), that is a loser drug with a new name and it's OTC, with the same bad ass side effects as it had before.

conspiracy? corruption? i see nothing wrong with considering it this way at all. it's out of control.

Some people may remember Chris Pittman. He just lost another court case. The US Supreme Court this Monday has decided not to hear his case. Chris was 12 and in the 6th grade when suffering from a severe side effect of Zoloft, killed his grandparents. He was tried as an adult and sentenced to 30 years in prison. Anyone interested in reading about his case, signing his petition or lending a hand can go to www.christopherpittman.org . I appreciate what you are trying to accomplish with this website and thank you.

I can't listen to it without getting pissed.

One significant, indeed glaring, point regularly overlooked by those psychiatrists still chasing diagnosis from the surface of matters [using only symptoms to make definitive challenging diagnosis] is the high denial of patient biology: real comorbid diagnosis seen with demonstrable brain imaging, the measurable relevance of metabolic rates [genetically determined], and abundant drug interactions.

The academics find themselves stuck when they comment on these reported matters as they still think the sun revolves around the earth, and that demonstrable brain function, reported in the literature and revisited therein for more that 20 years, is somehow "not valid." Reminds me of the church and heliocentrism.

These are the same individuals that take heated issue with SPECT imaging findings, deny the relevance of metabolic pathways with obvious drug interactions, and regularly indicate that prozac and paxil don't interact with amphetamines.

I do take exception with some of your points, as I do find antidepressant meds are predictably helpful, but must be used only in the context of clinically considering the entire picture.

So many meds are quickly written to address that small part of the picture delineated in the office - for the surface DSM 4 diagnosis: I have seen with SPECT imaging at least 13 different combinations of brain activities that can present as "ADD" - and almost all will create significant problems if not considered in sequence.

See here some notes on these antidepressant matters from about 1.5 yr ago... have seen these interactions for 10 years, but still find audience puzzlement when I bring them up.

http://www.corepsychblog.com/2006/11/how_that_ssri_a.html

Excellent postings, interesting comments,
Thanks
Chuck