The best available evidence suggests that fluoxetine may be the medication of choice for use in both MDD and anxiety disorders.
Personally i find such conclusions horrifying.
Four days prior to this the telegraph had published ...
Commenting on the findings of the review Professor Gotzsche added, "It is absolutely horrendous that they have such disregard for human lives."
What about Jake...
Wow look what i saw in the reference list in the Garland et al article...
These authors have referenced Keller.....(how come in 2016 this article is being referenced...?!?!?!)
- Keller MB, Ryan ND, Strober M, Klein RG, Kutcher SP, Birmaher B, McCafferty JP. Efficacy of paroxetine in the treatment of adolescent major depression: A randomized, controlled trial. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 2001;40(7):762–772. [PubMed]
I wonder what they referenced from Keller ??
'Some suffer from design, implementation or analytical problems that make results difficult to interpret. Some studies may have failed to demonstrate significant efficacy using primary outcomes but when secondary outcomes are analyzed they suggest significant differentiation from placebo or tricyclic comparators' (Keller et al., 2001)
hmmm ok so translated this means if supportive evidence cant be found for primary outcomes, that is your study is a negative study, then just change the rules and go data dredging, consult with the ghostwriters, misconduct experts and spin doctors and do what we did in the 2001 study in order to turn a negative study into a positive one... ie
Use of idiosyncratic coding system
Failure to transcribe all and adverse events from clinical record to an adverse event database
Filtering data on adverse events through statistical techniques
Restriction of reporting to events that occurred above a given frequency in any one group, Coding event under different headings for different patients (dilation),
Grouping of adverse events,
Insufficient consideration of severity,
Coding of relatedness to studied medication
Masking effects of concommit drugs,
Ignoring effects of drug withdrawal.
Here is an linked excerpt from the Garland et al study...this is in stark contrast to black box warning and all the information available today...
Best available data from controlled trials and health record databases alike show that SSRI treatment significantly decreases suicidal ideation and suicide attempts in young people (Cheung et al., 2006;March et al., 2004b; Mosholder, 2004; Kutcher & Gardner, 2008). Population studies demonstrate an inverse correlation between antidepressant use and youth suicide (Olfson, Shaffer, Marcus & Greenberg, 2003; Gibbons, Hur, Bhaumik & Mann, 2006). In addition, post-mortem studies have not demonstrated a relationship between SSRI use and youth suicide (Leon et al., 2006; Isacsson, Holmgren, & Ahlner, 2005). Given all available data to date it appears far more likely that SSRI use decreases suicide rates rather than increases them. At the individual patient level however, SSRI use can be associated with emotional/behavioral side effects that require appropriate clinical management. There is limited information comparing SNRIs to SSRIs. In one trial, there was no statistically significant difference in suicidality with venlafaxine compared to SSRIs, although both cardiovascular and dermatological adverse effect rates were higher than with SSRIs (Brent et al., 2008). There was an indicator of higher suicide-related behaviours with venlafaxine compared to SSRIs in a meta-analysis of trial data (Hammad et al., 2006).
In addition, post-mortem studies have not demonstrated a relationship between SSRI use and youth suicide (Leon et al.,
Here is the conclusion from this study...
The detection of antidepressants at autopsy was quite rare in youth suicides in New York City from 1999 to 2002.
Here is the thing what if they stopped taking their drug and it left the system but the system is now a profoundly impaired-inwithdrawal- one ..would it not be more accurate to consider who had ever been exposed to an ad and when rather than who had or did not have ad in the body?
Like Mr Keller they may not considering withdrawal ...
When i look at that Mosholder link i find a disclaimer in respect of prozac being
The statements contained in this document(s) are those of the product's sponsor, not FDA, and FDA does not necessarily agree with the sponsor's statements. FDA has not made a final determination about the safety or effectiveness of the product described in this document.
Is Andy just going on whatever the company tells him then? Wouldnt be a first ...
In a 1993 FDA approval review of Risperdal, Andrew Mosholder, one of the agencies reviewers, notes that:
“The sponsor reports no instance of risperidone abuse or dependence. Withdrawal phenomena were not formally assessed after patients discontinued risperidone. Several patients committed suicide within one month of discontinuing risperidone, however, it does not seem reasonable to attribute this to withdrawal, given the absence of other indications of a risperidone withdrawal syndrome and the fact that schizophrenia is known to be a risk factor for suicide”.
Healy commented on this statement from Mosholder saying ."[it] is a totally unwarranted assumption. There is a compelling case antipsychotics cause dependence and withdrawal" "[Risperdal] data do not include suicides and suicidal acts that might have been triggered by withdrawal. "
Do you think Mosholder is wrong in respect of ads as well ?
I'm too lazy to look into it but whats the bet that the Mosholder and Cheung links in 2004 and 2006 (claiming ads decrease suicide ) came out just prior to the FDA hearings in respect of ads causing suicide... covert pharma attempts to protect their golden goose.
2000 amitryptaline, nortriptaline venlafaxine clonazepam for arm pain from keyboard use, told I had a chemical imbalance it would fix my arm was just a matter of finding the right med for me not informed of the nature of these drugs assured safe and not addictive, CT off Effexor after being told to double the dose on reporting adverse effects...later ..uncharacteristic psych panic tearful presented to doctor to get answers. Given paroxetine no questions asked 'safe and not addictive' next please.2001-2010 paroxetine (paxil) 2 failed attempts to quit, a learned helplessness set in. Feb 10 - Sept 10, 8 month clueless taper, hell. Doc said I had underlying depression .. I said that's not right' then found online support group and the truth!...overcome with inconceivable humiliation and outrage. 28 Sept 10 drug free ... daily psych and emotional torture beginning in the waking hours of the morning receding somewhat in the evening only to start up again the next day. 28 Sept 12 (24 months) Stabilizing (What an indescribable unimaginable non-functional nightmare). sleep issues start up at 3 yrs waking daily at 2am -4.30am)28 Sept 15 (5yrs drug free), cf, cmw, insomnia horrifying pssd continues, still feel Rip van Winkle-ish, cognitively doing heaps better. 28 Sept 16 after 6 yrs start working again on a casual basis.
"It is unsafe for people who suffer from something that could be treated with an ssri to consult a psychiatrist." Gotzshe 2015. [ I think Gotzsche could have easily meant to say 'to consult anyone with prescribing privileges'].
“Paroxetine is not safe, it is not effective and it meets every known definition of addictive.” McLaren, N, (2016) 'Psychiatry as bullsh*t’ p55..."Psychiatry is stuffed full of 'deep nonsense' better known as bullsh*t." McLaren 2016
"Within the first week of when you go on an antidepressant you may have a sexual dysfunction, it can go on forever, often only appearing when you go off the drug ...its extraordinarily common" Healy 2015
See my intro post #451 for the xanax back story and for a CV -GSKs. Come on guys get taperwise see a TaperMe Schedule.
For a staggeringly shocking 'prozac back story' see the truth post #523
"If I were an enemy combatant and the NZ army did this to me someone would be dragged to the Hague and jailed!" nz11