This is supposed to be a new indication? Why, this time last year, my doctor was using Seroquel as the be all and end all treatment for depression, never mind just as add on treatment.
Despite the fact that it was entirely ineffective, the good doctor just kept insisting that it would do the job. We actually got into a funny little impasse there where he was telling me my depression was lifting at the same time as I was continuing to plot suicide. Ah, well, a little kidney dialysis and I was right as rain again. Thank you, Dr. Mark Atkins of Victoria, British Columbia for a job well done. Asshole.

Oh! Now I know the origin of my back pain.
What is dead in the head feeling?
FDA just approved what psychiatrist are already doing for more than 8 years.
I was prescribed, even though I was never diagnosed "depressive", Seroquel in 2001.
Can't cope with withdrawal...
Have to take it till death.
Heart attack? Great!
My two grandfathers died at a early age of heart attack and some of my uncles and aunties too.
I didn't gain weight. Lucky! No diabetes... yet?
I don't know if it's Seroquel or Effexor that causes some of the side effects.
FDA... you belong to jail.
I second Francesca:

Thanks Dr. Jiosef Fainberg, APA member*!, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil for a job well done. Asshole.

*He was learning to speak English and one day I called him but he could not answer because he was attending class at his office.
I wonder how he gets in touch with the others APAs. He must have already learned by now, such a dedicated student.

APA we have a problem.

Great, just what we need - more people driving around under the influence of antipsychotics.

The FDA is WORTHLESS for drug safety, how this drug can still be promoted for use while litigation is happening, is beyond thought.

The government agency has not taken an oath to first do no harm, obviously.

Francesca wrote: "...he was telling me my depression was lifting at the same time as I was continuing to plot suicide..."

This is what I hate about psychiatry... when the doctor proclaims to "know" what is going on (or "should" be going on) INSIDE THE PATIENT'S OWN HEAD!!!

(Granted, it works the other way, too, when I ask a patient how he or she is feeling, I can't tell whether it's true or not, but I'd rather give the benefit of the doubt to the patient, not Astra-Zeneca.)

http://bipolarsoupkitchen-stephany.blogspot.com/2009/12/us-fda-approves-seroquel-for-10-year.html

AstraZeneca sinks its talons into the children of America: approved for 10 year olds, SZ, bipolar!

I saw a television commercial the other day advertising Seroquel for treatment of "bipolar depression". In the side effect list they rattle off, they implied Seroquel is an antidepressant by saying something about "common side effects of antidepressants are...".

SteveBMD, absolutely, I've been saying that for a long time. It's a field where progress in the treatment course is almost entirely determined by patient reports AND THEY DON'T LISTEN TO THEIR PATIENTS.

nvam, the representatives pushing Seroquel XR in docs' offices have been doing this for a long time. Their main line to docs seems to be "When you see depressive symptoms in your patients, we want you to think about Seroquel XR." Obviously, they're not explicitly saying to give it to patients with unipolar depression (although they'll start now, I'm sure) but that's clearly the implication.

So many of you are my role models. I hope someday to have the courage you have, to publically "thank" the psychiatrist in Memphis TN whose insistance I take Zyprexa surely triggered my diabetes.

http://corporatecrime.wordpress.com/2009/12/03/astrazeneca-tales-of-a-deadly-drug-pusher/

Here's a good summary!

Seroquel is a nast nast nasty drug, dude. I have no f8king idea why anyone would willingly take that crap.

I mean, if the problem is GENUINE PSYCHOSIS, then sure, why not try me on some seroquel. I imagine that feeling tired and dumb/numb is better than hallucinating and believing the FBI is going to decapitate me because my mind is a computer bank full of all the secrets of the world. Or something. I've had fucked up thoughts (though never genuine psychosis) and it is quite terrifying. If I had those thoughts all the time, if they never went away, I might actually prefer seroquel dumbness to confusion/distortion/fear.

But, on the other hand, you have perfectly normal college kids taking seroquel for anxiety and insomnia... or "PTSD" and such. That's just total f'ing bullshit.

Most of the time, in these cases, it's used at subtheraputic doses of 25, 50, or 100 mgs. It's being used as an extremely expensive form of benadryl, more or less. 25mg of diphenhydramine costs pennies and does the same thing as 25mg of seroquel. Histamine blocker.

There's a certain type of weirdo psychiatric client who wants to feel uber sick. The idea of taking a medication like seroquel is actually appealing to them because it makes them feel validated, like "if I'm taking an antipsychotic it means my pain and suffering is oh so ReAl". They don't want to feel better, because their whole identity is being a psych patient (ironically they rarely have serious mental illness like schizophrenia or manic depression). They are typically emotionally sensitive/dependent types who need chronic/constant support and validation and so they take on this sick role for the benefits of support from a doctor/therapist/other patients. They often umbrella under dx like depression w. borderline features, or a fake dx of bipolar II (a lot of ppl dx with bipolar II are basically just borderline/depressive).

I think seroquel is marketed to this type of client.

BTW, I really really can't feasibly see how that horse crap can help depression. When I took seroquel at a baby dose for insomnia/agitation, the only thing that happened was
1) becoming almost immediately zonked
2) eating like a beast a few minutes later
3) sleeping for 4 hrs and then waking up again (same thing diphenhydramine does to me)
4) becoming FURIOUSLY ANGRY in a way I've rarely ever been 8 hours later (I've been told that seroquel is also a norepinephrine reputake inhibitor and this sort of paradoxical/rebound furious reaction happens sometimes).
5) And of course, feeling drugged and stupid and slow

No where during this chain of events did I recall myself feeling happier more optimistic or motivated. But then again, isn't that true of all antidepressants?

I really wish I could introduce all, who believe antipsychotics are the answer, to my aunt. I think people would change their tune if they were able to see what the long term use of antipsychotics does to one's brain, with the added bonus of permanent lip smacking. So, now she's not only still psychotic, her brain is mush, and she smacks her lips uncontrollably. Fabulous!

Me too Lisa--until people face reality and stop believing the pharma stats and NAMI stats that promote the drug use only--not reality based real life people suffering on the drugs and still psychotic--they won't understand.

I know you get it, and I wish we didn't if you know what I mean.

Stephany, the last time I saw my aunt she didn't even know who I was. I told her my name and it still didn't ring a bell. I grew up near her and was always very close to her. They f'd her over so badly. It's like she has dementia now. Yeah, I'm so thankful for these wonder drugs.

I find it interesting that I never ran into meds-are-the-answer family members when I was in the psych ward. Do you see them visit the hospital your daughter is in? Where exactly do they hang out?

Always easy to talk about this kind of stuff in the abstract. A little different when you know the person who is deteriorating due to the effects of these meds, isn't it?

There are basically no visitors, Lisa. I'm often the only one there, the NAMI parents are found here in the court waiting room, and a summation of several parents: "just get the kid some help". these are the most painful times for me, in that waiting room, these parents believe that their loved one only needs meds.

My daughter, was the only person to have company on Thanksgiving Day

Yes, horrible to see them suffer on the meds, suffering, period.

I hope I was specific in stating, that they do not visit their people, they lock them up and don't visit them

My 16 yr old daughter took 50 tylenol PM 3 weeks ago while on Prozac and Seroquel. Of course the doctors will not report it as a side effect of meds. They say she still has issues and switched to celexa. She was just sent home from school last week becasue she had blades in her purse and wanted to hurt herself again.

They started all of these meds because she tried to hurt herself and found she has hashimoto thyroid. I don't think she needs all these meds now that her thyroid level is better but I am losing this battle with doctors and my family.

> This is supposed to be a new indication? Why, this time last year, my doctor was using Seroquel as the be all and end all treatment for depression, never mind just as add on treatment.

During one of my hospitalizations, some of us got to talking, and somehow every patient of this one doctor happened to be on Zyprexa... for depression, mania, anxiety, hallucinations. Talk about off-label use. Really, they might just slip a little olanzepine in the multivitamins and be done with it, since it clearly cures all ills.

I thought in order for a substance to be approved, both safety AND efficacy had to be demonstrated.

Safety, well, i realize i'm about to get slammed by other readers, but i still maintain that it's up to DOCTORS to weigh risks versus benefits. So if a drug is safe enough to justify use on only severely ill patients, then it should be approved for that use specifically, and then the doctors should take that shit seriously and not go passing it around like candy.

Now, as for efficacy -- I thought results were still coming in on the atypical antipsychotics and were not all that promising for use on disorders other than psychosis. Have i got that wrong? And if that's the case, how can they have possibly determined that atypical antipsychotics are effective for indications like bipolar, childhood psychiatric bullshit diagnosis, etc.?

> I find it interesting that I never ran into meds-are-the-answer family members when I was in the psych ward.

Lisa, i realize this comment wasn't directed at me, but i have a question for you anyway. When you talk about the "meds-are-the-answer" people... Are you talking specifically about people who promote the use of psych meds when they have been shown not to work? (As seems to be the case with your aunt; you say she's still psychotic. That's awful, by the way, that the docs would continue to treat someone with a medicine that has debilitating side effects with no clear benefit. I'm sorry to hear that.) Or something else?

(I apologize for the repeat posts, although i am not actually sorry as i am now going to post a third thing in a row.)

Chris,

Did the doctors not check her thyroid levels before starting her on antidepressants, or did it just take them awhile to figure out the reason for her thyroid depression? Good medical practice is to rule out obvious physical causes of depression FIRST, so i'd say they done fucked up. I'm disappointed but not surprised to hear it. (Teenaged girl automatically equals depression, right? Oh, the bullshit i've got for being a reticent female.)

What was the rationale for putting her on the Seroquel? (I ask because it sounds like it was done early in her treatment, which is weird. Usually it makes more sense to start with an antidepressant only.)

Well, others here have more expertise on this subject than i do. I hope you find some help and good support for both you and your daughter.

Unfortunately, Sarah, doctors are doctors. They are NOT trained scientists, nor medical researchers. Med school amounts to little more than massive amounts of memorization. Therefore, I really don't think doctors are a good judge of safety, as they get their information mostly from drug sales reps (not exaggerating) and journal articles ghostwritten by drug companies. For example, for years doctors insisted that extrapyramidal symptoms (parkinsonisms) caused by dopamine-blocking drugs (antipsychotics) were either part of the psychiatric illnesses or "proof of the therapeutic nature of the drugs". It was only as the NEW antipsychotics were coming out that the truth about the drugs came out from the companies themselves, that the drugs caused that damage, and only then, did doctors start admitting it en masse - just in time for the so-called "newer" "better" drugs to come out.

The solution? Massive longitudinal, re-world databases and studies sponsored by public interests. Not really gonna happen, but that's in an ideal world. It would also help if more psychiatrists would ABRE LOS OJOS and look at what's in front of them.

Good point, kimbriel, and i think that's part of the problem -- They _should_ have some background in research. Some doctors do (they get an M.A. or whatever before going to med school), but that's purely by their own choice. If they're going to make decisions based on research findings, they should have a good understanding of how to interpret those findings.

The other problem that you alluded to is that most of the research is sponsored by the drug companies themselves and is short-term and not very comprehensive in nature. I agree completely that this is problematic. It's fair that companies should be the ones to pay to prove the safety and efficacy of their own compounds in order for them to be approved for general use, but that should be a first step only, and their results should be treated as preliminary, and the drugs should be used with caution. (Welcome to Utopia!)