GlaxoSmithKline's Requip and Paxil in the Dock

British pharmaceutical giant, GlaxoSmithKline, have just been ordered to pay almost €200,000 [$260,000 US] to a man who claimed that Requip [ropinirole] turned him into a sex and gambling addict.

Requip, a drug to help with Parkinson's disease, carries many side effects which can include hypersexuality and compulsive gambling, even in patients without a prior history of these behaviours [1]

Didier Jambart, writes thejournal.ie, had suffered side effects after being administered the drug Requip in 2003 for the illness, which causes tremors, slows movement and disrupts speech.

“It’s a great day,” he said. “It’s been a seven-year battle with our limited means for recognition of the fact that GSK lied to us and shattered our lives.”


In other news, a US jury has awarded $1.5 million to the family of a man who committed suicide.

Joseph Mazella, a 51 year old high school basketball coach and teacher, had been prescribed GlaxoSmithKline's antidepressant, Paxil. Strangely, Mazella was on the medication for 10 years in which time he never once saw his prescribing physician, William Beals, M.D.

On Aug. 9, 2009 Mazella and his wife contacted Beals who magically made a diagnosis over the telephone before doubling Mazella's Paxil dosage from 20mg to 40mg and also adding Zyprexa.

Story continues here

Comment

Here we have two cases which, in essence, pretty much amount to the same in as much that two people were given psychiatric drugs that made them do things that they really had no intention of doing.

I'm currently reading Joseph Glenmullen's book, "Prozac Backlash" to try and get a better understanding of the serotonin-dopamine connection.

Glenmullen writes:

"Dopamine is a close chemical partner of serotonin. A large body of research over decades has implicated dopamine, not serotonin, in these disorders, regardless of whether or not they are caused by medications or by diseases such as Parkinsons...

"As reports of these side effects occuring with the Prozac group (SSRi's) have mounted, researchers have been puzzled by the question of how drugs that boost serotonin could cause side effects usually linked to dopamine.

"Working out the full details of the serotonin-dopamine connection may take decades or more. Meanwhile, we are left with the clinical reality of these serious side effects, which in some cases are devastating. The unfortunate irony is that drugs heavily promoted as correcting unproven biochemical imbalances may, in fact, be causing imbalances and brain damage."

The promotion of SSRi's such as Paxil has seen pharmaceutical companies spend billions of dollars on promoting products that they really know nothing about. Withdrawal reactions to SSRi's and reports of suicide are downplayed by pharmaceutical spokespersons and key opinion leaders, who, ironically, are paid vast amounts of dollars by pharmaceutical companies to promote the use of SSRi's.

In the six or so years I was taking Seroxat [Paxil] I did many things that I wouldn't have done if I had not taken it. I look back now and wonder if a; Seroxat induced these thoughts and b; if my brain has been damaged by long term use of Seroxat.

Will I and the millions of others who have, at some point, taken an SSRi be more prone to develop Parkinson's or Huttingdon's disease?

Only time will tell.

That's some price to pay for taking a pill that was apparently safe and effective, huh?


[1] Bostwick JM, Hecksel KA, Stevens SR, Bower JH, Ahlskog JE (2009). "Frequency of new-onset pathologic compulsive gambling or hypersexuality after drug treatment of idiopathic Parkinson disease".  [Link]

The Marketing of Aropax in Australia and the A Plus Project

Well, my Aropax starter pack from 2002 arrived in the post. It's a DeLorean trip back to 2002 folks and an insight into how GlaxoSmithKline Australia promoted the use of their wonder drug. For those that don't know, Aropax is the brand name used in Australia for Seroxat, which, confusingly, is known as Paxil in the US and Canada.

The information that came with the starter pack is full of... let's just say misleading information regarding reasons why the patient was depressed.

I've shot a short video that explains it better. I'll upload some photo's of the pack soon.




You shocked?

I'm thinking Huggy Bear and Starsky & Hutch!

Back stories:

GSK Australia and the Aropax Project

GSK Australia and the Aropax Promotion



Fid


ORDER THE PAPERBACK
'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman
US & CANADA HERE OR UK FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE

SSRI chemical imbalance theory

The following is an extract taken from a featured article called 'The Media and the Chemical Imbalance Theory of Depression' by Jonathan Leo & Jeffrey R. Lacasse.

Abstract

The cause of mental disorders such as depression remains unknown. However, the idea that neurotransmitter imbalances cause depression is vigorously promoted by pharmaceutical companies and the psychiatric profession at large. We examine media reports referring to this chemical imbalance theory and ask reporters for evidence supporting their claims. We then report and critique the scientific papers and other confirming evidence offered in response to our questions. Responses were received from multiple sources, including practicing psychiatrists, clients, and a major pharmaceutical company. The evidence offered was not compelling, and several of the cited sources flatly stated that the proposed theory of serotonin imbalance was known to be incorrect. The media can play a positive role in mental health reporting by ensuring that the information reported is congruent with the peer-reviewed scientific literature.

Before you read the full article, take a look at the following:

Lexapro - Manufacturer - H. Lundbeck A/S - Denmark – (Forest Laboratories in the US) - "Lexapro corrects this chemical imbalance andmay help relieve the symptoms of depression" [Patient Information Leaflet]

Cipramil / Marketed under the Brand Name Celexa in the US - Manufacturer - H. Lundbeck / American partner Forest Laboratories: Google search "Celexa helps to restore the brain’s chemical balance by increasing the supply of a chemical messenger in the brain called serotonin."

Pristiq - Manufacturers - Wyeth: "As an SNRI, PRISTIQ affects the levels of two neurotransmitters thought to play a key role in depression — serotonin and norepinephrine. Serotonin and norepinephrine are chemicals that occur naturally in the brain. While no one knows for sure what causes depression, many experts believe that it may occur when neurotransmitters are out of balance." Pristiq website

Aropax [Seroxat] - Manufacturer - GlaxoSmithKline: "Aropax corrects the chemical imbalance and so helps relieve the symptoms of depression." GSK Australia

Geodon - Manufacturer - Pfizer: "How GEODON Works. Doctors believe GEODON helps balance certain natural chemicals in your brain. Balancing these chemicals helps treat your symptoms of acute manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar disorder. And that can help you feel better." - Geodon Website

There are many more. Now read the article

Fid

Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

ORDER THE PAPERBACK
'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman
SIGNED COPIES HERE OR UNSIGNED FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

An Interview with Joanna Moncrieff: The Myth of the Chemical Cure

Thanks to one of my readers, Ruth, for passing this on to me.

It's an interview with Joanna Moncrieff, author of the book, 'The Myth of the Chemical Cure: A Critique of Psychiatric Drug Treatment'

I shall re-publish the entire interview here for you all to read. The original page can be found here.

----

In this interview she responds to questions about this so – called "chemical imbalance" and the treatment of depression.

1) Dr. Moncrieff, first of all, what led you to write this about about "the myth of the chemical cure"?

What is written in textbooks about psychiatric drugs and how they work never seemed to match up to reality to me. So I started to look carefully at the research on drugs and gradually I came to realise that there was no evidence that they were acting specifically- that they were reversing the basis of a disease- as it was claimed. At the same time I was interested in how drugs came to be so highly regarded in psychiatry- how they came to be the dominant form of treatment. I realised that it was because they were believed to be specific that they were seen as so important, because the idea that they are specific underpins the idea that psychiatry is a medical activity, concerned with reversing medical diseases.

So I began to try and trace how the idea- the myth as I believed it - that they are specific treatments was constructed.

2) I would think that when people have to deal with the death of a mother/father, brother/sister, or even a pet, I think that it is natural and normal to feel depressed. When did we start giving anti-depressant medication for the normal transitions of life that we all have to endure?

The modern concept of depression, as a common condition in need of medical treatment, was invented and promoted in order to market the earliest antidepressants in the 1960s. However, it was when the market for benzodiazepines collapsed in the late 1990s that the pharmaceutical industry turned to depression to create a mass market.

It was during the 1990s that the idea that depression affects up to 1 in 4 of the population and other such figures were publicised and the motive was to create a market for the new and profitable antidepressants known as SSRIs.

3) How exactly do psychiatrists find out if there is a real chemical imbalance in the brain? Or are they just experimenting with patients?

Psychiatrists have no way of telling that someone has a chemical imbalance. The idea that depression is caused by a chemical imbalance is simply a hypothesis. There is no consistent evidence that there is any biochemical abnormality in people diagnosed as depressed. The idea has been promoted by drug companies and professional organisations, but the evidence base for it is almost non existent. Most experts say that the fact that people improve when you give them antidepressants is the strongest evidence that there is a chemical imbalance. But there are other ways of explaining this- antidepressants are psychoactive drugs, that may suppress emotional feelings, or just sedate people.

Anyway, as recent research shows, people improve barely more with antidepressant than they do with a placebo.

4) The number of pills for a wide variety of so- called " mental illnesses " seems to have skyrocketed. Someone is making a lot of money pushing these pills. Is it all about money?

Partly, but it is also about professional status. Psychiatrists push pills because it bolsters their position as doctors. Also governments have supported medical interventions like drugs because they look like simple solutions to otherwise complex and intractable problems. Also we live at a time when big business is very powerful, and governments are unwilling to reign it in.

5) I know there are some violent, aggressive, assaultive patients who either have to be physically restrained, or put in a special room, or a straight jacket. In such instances, are we simply sedating the patient or are we really treating them?

I think everyone would admit that at times like these we are simply sedating them, or using chemical restraint. What is more open to dispute is what we are doing to people whose behaviour is chronically antisocial, disturbing and maybe irrational. People like this are usually diagnosed as having chronic schizophrenia, or some other mental disorder. In this case, the drug treatment they are inevitably given on a long-term basis is dressed up as a treatment, but is often aimed at controlling their behaviour.

6) Are there germs, bacteria, viruses, and things that can be seen under a microscope that cause "mental illness"?

No- there are no proven physical causes of any mental illnesses.

7) We all have to deal with anxiety- we have to work, take tests, deal with disgruntled people- why do some people need anti-anxiety pills for the problems that we all have to face---and do these folks have some type of chemical imbalance?

Everyone is different and some people find stress harder to deal with than others.

This is partly due to upbringing and environment, but some of it is probably due to the variation in our biological makeup. However, I don't think it is something you can pinpoint, like a chemical imbalance.

It's just that we are all different, biologically as well as psychologically. You can't "correct" these differences (assuming you could identify them, which I don't think you will ever be able to do) without eradicating individuality itself.

8) Is there really such a disease as attention deficit disorder or is this just a bunch of symptoms that have been lumped together in some fashion?

Its not my specialist area, but child psychiatrists I know say that they can always find a better explanation for a child's behaviour than calling it ADHD. ADHD is a label that locates the problem in the individual child, whereas I suspect the problem really often lies in the family and the wider environment. The only reason for giving someone the label of ADHD, of course, is in order to justify giving the child stimulants. There is a big debate about whether these are useful- and if so whether they are worthwhile. They can make a child pay attention at first, but whether this is really beneficial is unclear. Also their effects probably wear off (like most drugs taken for long periods)- and the latest 3 year follow up of the biggest randomized trial of stimulants shows no benefits over non drug treatment at three years.

9) I have read some crazy stuff on the Internet about statins being given to 8 year old children. Is there any sane, reasonable, rational, realistic reason to give an 8 year old child a statin?

I don't know about the wisdom of giving children statins, but childhood obesity (not a nice word) is certainly an indication that there is something very wrong with our society. It is also caused of course by drugs like the new antipsychotics, which are being more commonly prescribed to children. So some childhood obesity is being caused by drugs in the first place.


10) Here in the United States, we once had a commercial that said " relief is just a swallow away". Have the pharmaceuticals taken this mass drugging way too far?

Everyone is looking for a magic bullet for everything nowadays. The pharmaceutical industry have certainly helped create this situation, but again I think it is the broader political climate that has encouraged this to happen. Popping pills to solve your problems is a perfect consumerist activity, and it helps keep people so worried that they don't have time to challenge the system. Accepting life's ups and downs is not a good recipe for keeping people working their guts out to buy more stuff.

11) I often see individuals who seem to have no coping skills, low frustration tolerance and a lack of thinking skills. Should not these people get training and counseling, rather than some pill for their alleged " chemical disorder"?

Yes, these would be better, but often there is no individual solution. We have to ask why some people get this way, and what changes we can make to society to prevent it happening and to help them when it does.

12) Are there any psychiatric diagnosis which in your mind, are true "chemical imbalances" for example chronic schizophrenia?

No. Organic conditions like dementia and learning disability have a physical basis (but not a simple chemical imbalance). For mental illnesses like schizophrenia, manic depression and others, no physical cause has ever been proven. It is often said that we have evidence that they are genetic- but this evidence is much weaker than presented (Jay Joseph gives a good deconstruction of this). It is said that people with schizophrenia have different shaped brains- but again the evidence is weak and inconsistent and drug induced effects have not been ruled out.

13) Do you have a web site where we can get more information?

The Critical Psychiatry Network has a website where there are many interesting papers posted and other information. The address is www.criticalpsychiatry.co.uk

14) What question have I neglected to ask?

Whatever mental illnesses consist of, and we do not know, but have no good evidence at present to think they are caused by specific brain diseases like real neurological conditions, when we treat them with drugs we are merely drugging people. This may suppress the symptoms, which may be helpful for a while, but obviously there are adverse consequences. If you are drugged you are usually slower and less emotionally sensitive than if you are not under the influence of drugs. Psychiatrists need to be more honest about this- but so do politicians and society as a whole. We are pretending to treat or cure people with mental illness because that makes us feel alright about controlling them. Sometimes we need to control them but we should at least be honest about what we are doing. Pharmaceutical companies are cashing in on our dishonesty.

Published August 7, 2008

Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

ORDER THE PAPERBACK
'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman
SIGNED COPIES HERE OR UNSIGNED FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

SEROXAT - WILL YOU TAKE IT?

Quite a U Turn considering they said this...

Fid

Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

ORDER THE PAPERBACK
'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman
SIGNED COPIES HERE OR UNSIGNED FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

Uncomfortably Numb

Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

By Bob Fiddaman

ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD HERE


PAPERBACK COMING SOON

Reply from Patient UK's Hilary Cole

I have had a response from Patient UK after I alerted them to a post about them I wrote a few days ago.

I have replied to the email (see blue txt)

----- Original Message -----
From: Hilary Cole
To: fiddaman64
Cc: Patient Webmaster
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:21 PM
Subject: RE: patient.co.uk - site feedback - SSRIs

Dear Bob

Further to your feedback, I have passed your comments to the author of the leaflet. At the time of writing (June 2006) all the information would have been based on fully evidence-based reference sources. When he gets back from leave (he is away at present) I’m sure the author will respond to you direct with regard to the specific comments on your blog.

In the meantime you suggest a number of times that Patient UK receives funding from drug companies, eg “Is this site/organisation funded by Pharma?”, “This just has to be funded by pharma in some way?” and “Are they funded by pharma? Is this what is known as Astroturfing?”

Patient UK is not, and never has been, funded externally in any way. The following is taken from the ‘About Us’ page, see http://www.patient.co.uk/about.asp, which I suggest you should have read before posting your highly emotive blog:

Advertising and Funding
Independent editorial control of Patient UK and site construction are wholly funded by EMIS. Patient UK makes no user charge and receives no funding from external sources, for example drug companies.

Advertising banners and skyscrapers on the site provide income revenue by means of page display or 'click thru'. Adverts are provided by external sources and are not endorsed by Patient UK. All revenue from this source is passed to EMIS.

So please would you remove this spurious suggestion from your blog.

Something we do on Patient UK is encourage people to post their own experiences of medical conditions and drugs on our sister site – the Patient UK Experience Forum, http://experience.patient.co.uk. I suggest you go to this site and search on seroxat to see the vast number of postings that have been received on this topic. We use as many opportunities that we can think of to get the messages posted in the forum across to interested parties, eg health trusts and pcts, government agencies, NHS departments etc.

It’s interesting that you have the Unite Against Bullying.com logo on your website and yet to my mind your posting about the SSRI leaflet on Patient UK is of an extremely bullying nature.

Regards
Hilary ColeContent Manager
Tel: 01329 828564
Email: hilary.cole@kbs.e-mis.co.ukwww.patient.co.uk
www.mentor-online.com

MY REPLY

Bullying nature?

The advice given on your page is, at best, shoddy!

4 weeks to come off an SSRi? Are you criminally insane?

Thanks for your reply Hilary. Where as I merely make suggestions your website hands out advice that is outdated, wrong and could cause serious harm to patients tapering from SSRi's. I see no question marks on any of the lines written by your team of withdrawal experts, therefore I assume you believe their advice to be correct?

I visited the forum you suggested - a mish mash of patients saying yes it's fine and some saying no it's not.

The point of my blog Hilary is to raise awareness. The point of Patient UK, it seems, is to offer advice to patients withdrawing from SSRi's [at least a certain section of it is]

Talk to the experts on this matter Hilary, those poor sods whose lives have been blighted because of information, such as is given on Patient UK sings straight from the book of Pharma.

Yes, I do have a Unite Against Bullying logo on my page, well spotted. I don't like bullying Hilary. I also don't like it when I read so called experts on SSRi's touting the now defunct chemical imbalance theory, or when so called experts make no mention of the FACT that antidepressants [SSRi's] should not really be used in mild to moderate depression [they are as useful as a placebo]. Nor do I take kindly to the claim that 'Most people have either minor, or no, side-effects.' Where did your 'experts' do their homework? Nor do I like it when your 'experts' claim 'The leaflet that comes in the drug packet gives a full list of possible side-effects.' - The list on the PIL DOES NOT include a full list, certainly not in the case of Seroxat.

I also found the advice on SSRi withdrawal contradictory with the statement 'SSRIs are not tranquillisers, and are not thought to be addictive. (This is disputed by some people, and so this is a controversial issue. If addiction does occur, it is only in a minority of cases.)'

Now, they are either addictive or they are not. When giving advice it's best not to sit on the fence Hilary!

You excelled yourselves with "...Most people can stop an SSRI without any problem. At the end of a course of treatment you should reduce the dose gradually over about four weeks before finally stopping."

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW DANGEROUS THIS INFORMATION IS?

Don't talk to me about bullying when you practically are putting patients lives at risk Hilary.

Do your research, talk to patients, read the readily available files on the internet then amend your advice on SSRi's accordingly.

Regards

Bob


Seroxat Sufferers
http://fiddaman.blogspot.com

cc - To campaigners and other interested parties

Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

By Bob Fiddaman

ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD HERE


PAPERBACK COMING SOON

[Patient UK] UK Doctors being given false and misleading information.

During recent correspondence with Janice Simmons of the Seroxat User Group a website was brought to my attention regarding information given to doctors in the UK regarding SSRi antidepressants.

The site in question is Patient UK, their tag line being "The same information as provided by GP's to patients during consultations".

Let's see what they have to say about SSRi's [bear in mind that Doctors probably use this site, if Patient UK's tag line is to be believed]

SSRI antidepressants are used to treat depression and some other conditions. They take 2-4 weeks to work fully. Treatment usually lasts six months or more. Side-effects may occur, but are often minor. At the end of course of treatment, you should gradually reduce the dose as directed by your doctor before stopping completely.

This opening para is vague to say the least.

...used to treat depression and some other conditions?

Firstly, Patient UK does not state what level of depression SSRi's should be used for and secondly, what are the 'other conditions' SSRi's are used to treat?

...treatment usually lasts six months or more

Um... try six years in my case and I've read many stories where patients have been on SSRi's for much longer than six years too!

...Side-effects may occur, but are often minor

Is this site/organisation funded by Pharma?

...you should gradually reduce the dose as directed by your doctor before stopping completely.
No advice to the doctor about a tapering programme? Why? - Because there isn't one!

How do antidepressants work?

...An altered balance of serotonin and other neurotransmitters is thought to play a part in causing depression and other conditions.

Ah, the old chemical imbalance theory touted yet again. Nice to see they at least drop the word 'thought' in to cover themselves!

Antidepressants and depression

...Sometimes a life problem such as bereavement, redundancy, illness, etc, triggers a depression. Sometimes there is no apparent cause for a depression. However, antidepressants treat the symptoms of depression, whatever the cause.

No mention of the Kirsch study here? Why? Antidepressant use in people with mild to moderate depression is useless - a placebo is as effective!

But wait... Patient UK tell you in the next para how you know you are depressed.

...Symptoms of depression include: low mood, feelings of sadness, sleep problems, poor appetite, irritability, poor concentration, decreased sex drive, loss of energy, guilt feelings, headaches, aches, pains, and palpitations. If symptoms are eased, you not only feel better, but you may also be able to cope better with any problems or difficult circumstances.

Oh come on! This just has to be funded by pharma in some way?

How effective are SSRI antidepressants?

...About 5-7 in 10 people with depression improve within a few weeks of starting treatment with antidepressants. However, up to 3 in 10 people improve with dummy tablets (placebo) as some people would have improved in this time naturally. So, you are roughly twice as likely to improve with antidepressants compared to taking no treatment.

"...up to 3 in 10 people improve with dummy tablets (placebo) as some people would have improved in this time naturally."

Which begs the question - why take SSRi's?

The following para could have been written by the genius marketing team at GSK [though I'm not suggesting it was]

...If you find that the treatment is helpful after 3-4 weeks, it is usual to continue. A normal course of antidepressants lasts up to six months or more after symptoms have eased. If you stop the drug too soon, your symptoms may rapidly return. Some people with recurrent depression need longer courses of treatment.

How does one know when one is better? When one comes off the drug because he/she thinks they are better, withdrawal kicks in. The GP cannot recognise withdrawal [because the truth has been kept from him/her because of shoddy advice given to them such as the advice from Patient UK]

When you are taking SSRI antidepressants

...It is important to take the medication each day at the dose prescribed. Do not stop taking them abruptly. The dose is usually gradually reduced before stopping completely at the end of a course of treatment. But don't do this yourself - your doctor will advise on dosage reduction when the time comes. It is best not to stop treatment or change the dose without consulting a doctor.

Your doctor will advise you on a dosage reduction? Who advises the doctor? Have they learned this at med school? Perhaps Patient UK can shed some light on this? They seem to know an awful lot about SSRi's yet so very little about withdrawal. Are they funded by pharma?

Is this what is known as Astroturfing?

What about side-effects?

...Most people have either minor, or no, side-effects.

WHAT? - May I suggest, if they have balls big enough, for Patient UK to visit Paxil Progress or to download a section of the Paxil Protest petition where patients have left comments about the horrendous withdrawal effects they have experienced!

...The most common ones [side effects] include: diarrhoea, feeling sick, vomiting, and headaches.

Forgive me for sounding cynical here. Let me quote Alistair Benbow, Head of European Psychiatry for GlaxoSmithKline. "The side effects [of Paxil "discontinuance"] are things like dizziness, nausea, headache, um, and are clearly labeled in the information made available to doctors and patients."

Coincidence?

...It is worth keeping on with treatment if side-effects are mild at first.

Of course it is. It was designed that way. Try to come off, find the side effects intolerable so remain on it. GSK, in the case of Seroxat, wins - Everybody is happy, particularly those counting the pound notes and GSK investors!

...Minor side-effects may wear off after a week or so.

Shades of GlaxoSmithKline spokeswoman here: "If ‘discontinuation reactions’ occur in patients stopping [Paxil], the majority will experience symptoms that are mild to moderate in intensity, and are usually limited to two weeks." - Mary Anne Rhyne GlaxoSmithKline spokesperson

...The leaflet that comes in the drug packet gives a full list of possible side-effects.

No mention of suicidal thoughts, no mention of severe aggression, no mention of short term memory loss, no mention of an intolerance to sudden loud noises, no mention of electric shock sensations that rip through your body and make you want to lash out at anyone standing/sitting near to you.

...do not drive or operate machinery if you become drowsy whilst taking one.

Are the RAC or AA aware of this? What about motor insurance companies up and down the UK. So, in essence Patient UK are saying that if I worked in a factory on a lathe, I would not... sorry should not operate that lathe. What about if I was on this drug for 6 years or more? Would Patient UK expect my employer to wait until I had finished taking my SSri?

SSRI antidepressants and suicidal behaviour

...In recent years there have been some case reports which claim a link between taking SSRI antidepressants and feeling suicidal. The Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM) has recently reviewed the evidence on whether there is such a link. They were unable to find any convincing evidence of this link. The CSM has stated that it will continue to monitor this issue.

Because of this possible link, see your doctor promptly if you become restless, anxious or agitated, or if you have any suicidal thoughts. In particular, if these develop in the early stages of treatment or following an increase in dose.

I've got a better idea for Patient UK's readers, if you become restless, anxious or agitated, or if you have any suicidal thoughts download this and this. Once you have read how you have been duped check out the archives on this blog!

Are SSRI antidepressants addictive?

...SSRIs are not tranquillisers, and are not thought to be addictive. (This is disputed by some people, and so this is a controversial issue. If addiction does occur, it is only in a minority of cases.)

This is a very interesting statement by Patient UK, particularly the last line, "If addiction does occur, it is only in a minority of cases.)"

Wait a minute, it's either addictive or it isn't. That's like labelling cigarettes or cocaine addictive in a minority of cases. This is totally absurd, talk about sitting on the fence!

The following advice given by Patient UK, I believe, is false and misleading and, dare I say it, dangerous advice!

They write: "...Most people can stop an SSRI without any problem. At the end of a course of treatment you should reduce the dose gradually over about four weeks before finally stopping."

Four weeks? This advice is scandalous. Who are these people? What training, if any, have they been given? Have they ever witnessed Seroxat withdrawal first hand? Four weeks? How naive and unprofessional to offer such advice to people tapering from, what I deem, a highly addictive drug [in some people]

Finally, Patient UK offer the pharmaresque advice:

...An option if they do occur [withdrawal symptoms] is to restart the drug and reduce the dose even more slowly.

Who wins? Pharma!

I shall be contacting Patient UK, I suggest readers of this blog do as well. Air your grievances at them, tell them they are more or less quoting the likes of Benbow and Rhyne. Tell them your personal stories but more importantly tell them that THEY ARE WRONG and the information they are providing for GP's is causing unneeded hardship for patients taking SSRi's.

To kill two birds with one stone I hereby award Patient UK the Seroxat Sufferers Dumbass Award and wish for them to know that I will be digging a little deeper to see who funds their organisation. I notice from the content of the webpage that they include a link to Depression Alliance. You can read about Depression Alliance here, here and here and you can see how the former CEO of Depression Alliance sent me a series of emails that I found rather intimidating, maybe it's just me though you can judge for yourselves by reading them here, here , here, here, here and finally, here.

Patient UK can be contacted via the online web email here

A copy [url] of this post will be sent to Pateint UK and also the MHRA

Fid

Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

By Bob Fiddaman

ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD HERE


PAPERBACK COMING SOON

Not so N.I.C.E

Have spent much of the past few hours reading through the N.I.C.E. guidelines on SSRi's. It prompted me to write an email to them. I must say some of the advice given is, at best, naive.

Is it any wonder that UK GP's are handing out SSRi's like candy!

Here is the email:


Dear Sir/Madam,

I have just downloaded a copy of CG23 Depression: Quick reference guide (amended) from the N.I.C.E. website ( http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/index.jsp?action=download&o=29614) and as a former sufferer of Seroxat withdrawal would like to ask you a few questions. I have copied and pasted segments of the file and have followed each of them with a question. Please also find enclosed documents that should be of relevance to you when amending any future documents about SSRi's that you may offer healthcare workers in future.

I would like to add that SSRi withdrawal is a very serious problem and after reading your document I feel that N.I.C.E. are NOT taking this matter seriously.

My questions follow in blue text.

Yours sincerely

Bob Fiddaman

---

Prescription of an SSRI

• When an antidepressant is to be prescribed in routine care, it should be a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), because SSRIs are as effective as tricyclic antidepressants and are less likely to be discontinued because of side effects.

Can you tell me why it took me 18 months to taper off Seroxat using the liquid suspension form? Please refer to attachment 1 and you will see horror story after horror story of patients who have had... and still are having severe problems tapering off Seroxat (Paxil in the States)

Tolerance and craving, and discontinuation/withdrawal symptoms

• All patients prescribed antidepressants should be informed that, although the drugs are not associated with tolerance and craving, discontinuation/withdrawal symptoms may occur on stopping, missing doses or, occasionally, on reducing the dose of the drug. These symptoms are usually mild and self-limiting but can occasionally be severe, particularly if the drug is stopped abruptly.

I would like for N.I.C.E. to consider amending the above paragraph. Firstly, one craves the drug when its effects wear off, this is not as a result of the illness, it is a result of the side effects. In layman's terms, the intake of serotonin wears off and the patient may get zaps, cold sweats etc, therefore they crave more. Could you also consider changing the last line of the above para? Please stress the point that these types of drugs SHOULD NOT be stopped abruptly and also add to the word 'severe' - tell patients and healthcare specialists exactly what you mean by severe. Would this be possible?

Maintenance treatment with antidepressants

• Patients who have had two or more depressive episodes in the recent past, and who have experienced significant functional impairment during the episodes, should be advised to continue antidepressants for 2 years.

What are the implications of long term use of SSRi's? Has there ever been any scientific study that shows it is safe to continue taking SSRi's after a two year period? Could N.I.C.E. show me this evidence?

Where mild depression persists after other interventions, or is associated with psychosocial and medical problems, consider use of an antidepressant.

Has N.I.C.E. not taken the recent study by a University of Hull team that concluded the drugs actively help only a small group of the most severely depressed into account? Why would N.I.C.E. state that mild depression be treated with an SSRi when it has been proven that an SSRi will be about as effective as a placebo for this level of depression?

Treatment of moderate to severe depression in primary care

Starting treatment

• In moderate depression, offer antidepressant medication to all patients routinely, before psychological interventions.

Once again, I refer you to the recent study that indicates that SSRi's do not work in mild to moderate depression. Once again I have to ask N.I.C.E. why they are advising the use of SSRi's in moderate depression?

Discuss the patient’s fears of addiction or other concerns about medication. For example, explain that craving and tolerance do not occur.

As I pointed out earlier and as you will see from attachment 1 - Craving and tolerance DO occur. I suggest to N.I.C.E. that Seroxat in particular IS an addictive drug.


When starting treatment, tell patients about:

– the risk of discontinuation/withdrawal symptoms
– potential side effects.

Could N.I.C.E. elaborate on ALL side-effects reported and please list them in any future files they may offer healthcare specialists? See attachment 1 for a rough guide to some of the more 'aggressive' reactions to Seroxat.


Inform patients about the delay in onset of effect, the time course of treatment and the need to take medication as prescribed. Make available written information appropriate to the patient’s needs.

Also warn patients of ALL ages about the possible risk of suicide/suicide ideation - see attachment 2 (Glenmullen Report)


Monitoring risk

• See patients who are considered to be at increased risk of suicide or who are younger than 30 years old 1 week after starting treatment. Monitor frequently until the risk is no longer significant.

If a patient is 31, 32, 33 et al are they not to be considered at an increased risk of suicide? Once again I refer you to attachment 2 (Glenmullen Report)

If there is a high risk of suicide, prescribe a limited quantity of antidepressants.

If a patient feels suicidal when tapering from SSRi's what advice would N.I.C.E. give?

Monitor for signs of akathisia, suicidal ideas, and increased anxiety and agitation, particularly in the early stages of treatment with an SSRI.

Would N.I.C.E. consider changing the above to 'IN ALL stages of treatment with an SSRi' rather than 'in the early stages of treatment with an SSRi'?

Advise patients of the risk of these symptoms, and that they should seek help promptly if these are at all distressing.

Can N.I.C.E. elaborate to healthcare specialists exactly what they mean by 'distressing'?

If a patient develops marked and/or prolonged akathisia or agitation while taking an antidepressant, review the use of the drug.

What are the guidelines when reviewing the use of an SSRi?


Continuing treatment

For patients with a moderate or severe depressive episode, continue antidepressants for at least 6 months after remission.

Why?

Once a patient has taken antidepressants for 6 months after remission, review the need for continued antidepressant treatment. This review may include consideration of the number of previous episodes, presence of residual symptoms, and concurrent psychosocial difficulties.

Could N.I.C.E. also add to the above para 'A patient maybe experiencing serotonin withdrawal, this should not be confused with a depressive illness'

Choice of antidepressants

• For routine care, use an SSRI because they are as effective as tricyclic antidepressants and less likely to be discontinued because of side effects.

Please refer to attachment 1

If increased agitation develops early in treatment with an SSRI, provide appropriate information and, if the patient prefers, either change to a different antidepressant or consider a brief period of concomitant treatment with a benzodiazepine followed by a clinical review within 2 weeks.

Seroxat discontinuation should be administered by use of the oral suspension form and an oral syringe. One CANNOT taper slowly off a tablet unless they suck it for a few minutes, leave it on the side then suck it again the next day!


Stopping or reducing antidepressants

• Inform patients about the possibility of discontinuation/withdrawal symptoms on stopping or missing doses or reducing the dose. These symptoms are usually mild and self-limiting but can occasionally be severe, particularly if the drug is stopped abruptly.

Once again, the word 'severe' is merely glossed over. Could N.I.C.E. explain what the severe symptoms are?

Reduce doses gradually over a 4-week period; some people may require longer periods, and fluoxetine can usually be stopped over a shorter period.

On a personal level it took me 18 months to taper down from 40mg of Seroxat to 22mg of Seroxat. Would N.I.C.E. consider dropping the 4 week period statement. Please refer to attachment 1 to see exactly how many patients have taken months and in some cases years to taper from Seroxat.

For severe symptoms, consider reintroducing the original antidepressant at the effective dose (or another antidepressant with a longer half-life from the same class) and reduce gradually while monitoring symptoms.

So N.I.C.E. are suggesting if someone is having difficulty tapering from an SSRi the GP should reintroduce the SSRi at the effective dose? How then does the patient withdraw?

Ask patients to seek advice from their medical practitioner if they experience significant discontinuation/withdrawal symptoms.

What advice have N.I.C.E. given to medical practitioners for patients experiencing significant withdrawal problems?


I look forward to your response.

As a matter of public interest I will republish this email in its entirety on my blog 'Seroxat Sufferers'

Bob Fiddaman

http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/

cc Janice Simmons Seroxat User Group

Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

By Bob Fiddaman

ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD HERE


PAPERBACK COMING SOON

Truth About Antidepressants & Chemical Imbalance, Psychology

Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

By Bob Fiddaman

ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD HERE


PAPERBACK COMING SOON

GSK Endorse Seroxat Self Help & Patient Groups... it seems

Well, in this never ending world of change we now see GSK move the goalposts yet again regarding Seroxat 'problems'.

Rather than accept any form of responsibilty it now seems GSK are referring patients to self help and patient groups to discuss their problems with Seroxat... at least that's what the revised Patient Information Leaflet [PIL] says... or at least that's the way I read it. One could be forgiven for making this assumption due to the layout of the PIL

The PIL kicks off with: Eight Important Things You Need To Know About Seroxat.

(They put the onus on the doctor many times.)

Seroxat treats depression and anxiety disorders: Like all medicines it can have unwanted effects. It is therefore important that you and your doctor weigh up the benefits of treatment against the possible unwanted effects, before starting treatment.

Seroxat won't work straight away: Some people taking antidepressants feel worse before getting better. Your doctor should ask to see you again in a couple of weeks after you first start treatment. Tell your doctor if you haven't started feeling better

Some people who are depressed or anxious think of harming or killing themselves: If you start to feel worse, or think of harming or killing yourself see your doctor or go to a hospital straight away.

Don't stop taking Seroxat before talking to your doctor: If you stop taking Seroxat suddenly or miss a dose, you may get withdrawal effects.

If you feel restless and feel like you can't sit or stand still, tell your doctor: Increasing the dose of Seroxat may make these feelings worse.

Taking some other medicines with Seroxat can cause problems: You may need to talk to your doctor

If you are pregnant or planning to get pregnant: Talk to your doctor.

If you have more questions, ask your doctor or pharmacist (chemist) You may also find it helpful to contact a self-help group, or patient organisation, to find out more about your condition. Your doctor will be able to give you details.



Am I missing something here? Has there been an influx of doctors around the UK attending special classess that will educate them about Seroxat?

Self-help groups, patient organisations? - Wasn't this exactly what Janice Simmons asked Kent Woods (CEO MHRA) for at a meeting a couple of weeks ago?

And doctors know of these self-help groups and patient organisations? Funny, because I am pretty much up on the subject of Seroxat and I have never heard of any official self help groups.

Are GSK now saying that if all else fails listen to patient stories?

Fuck! Isn't this the message WE have been trying to get across to the MHRA for the past 6 years!

"You may also find it helpful to contact a self-help group, or patient organisation, to find out more about your condition."

Unless of course GSK are referring to self help groups or patient organisations that discuss the 'illness'? If this is the case then why add this terminology directly under the problems one can face whilst taking Seroxat?

The gem of the leaflet is the line:

"It is not fully understood how Seroxat and other SSRi's work but they may help by increasing the level of serotonin in the brain"

So glad that's been explained then!

It's funny because in 1996 the information GSK [then SmithKline Beecham] gave out was the complete opposite of what they give out today.

Back then they knew exactly how Seroxat worked... or at least they claimed they did.

"This medicine works by bringing the levels of serotonin back to normal"

"Seroxat works by releiving symptoms of depression and any associated anxiety"

So

1996 This medicine works by bringing the levels of serotonin back to normal

to

2007 It is not understood how Seroxat and other SSRi's work...

On one hand GSK/SKB are making it clear that Seroxat works by bringing the levels of serotonin back to normal then years down the line they are saying, "It is not understood how Seroxat and other SSRi's work"

That's quite a change in stance wouldn't you agree?

I guess there are two ways of looking at this. GSK can be seen to be the whiter than white company for updating the leaflet after taking into account the adverse reports of Seroxat or they can be seen to have dropped one humungous bollock by making the broad statement back in 1996 that they knew exactly how Seroxat worked. I would dearly love to know what scientific proof they used to make such a broad statement back then.

The 1996 flimsy leaflet can be read here

The revised 2007 version that goes into much more depth can be read here

Fid

Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

By Bob Fiddaman

ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD HERE


PAPERBACK COMING SOON

GSK Australia - Clearly Behind the times

"Aropax corrects the chemical imbalance and so helps relieve the symptoms of depression."
http://www.gsk.com.au/products_prescription-medicines_detail.aspx?view=64

The Irish equivalent of the MHRA, the Irish Medical Board, recently banned GlaxoSmithKline from claiming that paroxetine corrects a chemical imbalance even in their patient information leaflets [HERE].

Should the Australian equivalent of the MHRA do the same or do Australians have different enzymes from Europeans?

In fact I am unsure whether or not this is the stance of the MHRA?

Is the chemical imbalance theory fact or merely a theory?

If indeed it is a theory .. and only a theory, what the hell are GSK Australia playing out by making such a false and misleading claim?, If indeed it is misleading and false?

I've wrote about this before.

Maybe an email to the TGA will help?

Fid

----- Original Message -----
From: fiddaman
To: TGA.Advertising@tga.gov.au
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 1:00 PM
Subject: GSK claim - False and misleading


Dear Sir/Madam,

I wish to complain strongly about the claims GSK Australia are making on their webpage. - http://www.gsk.com.au/products_prescription-medicines_detail.aspx?view=64

They claim that:

"Aropax corrects the chemical imbalance and so helps relieve the symptoms of depression."

This is false and misleading according to this paper from Plos Medicine. http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0020392

I trust you will take this matter very seriously?

Sincerely

Mr Bob Fiddaman,
UK

Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

By Bob Fiddaman

ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD HERE


PAPERBACK COMING SOON

BMJ Letters & A plea to Kent Woods MHRA CEO

Thanks to the Truthman for alerting me to this group of letters published on the BMJ website in 2002

The whole thread can be found here

Some rather interesting ones:

The thread started was a Consultant Physician from Waterford Regional Hospital in Ireland. He writes...

The "dizziness" associated with paroxetine withdrawal has happened to me on two seperate occasions of dose-reduction, and within two days on each occasion. The nearest description I can apply to the sensation is the feeling of having one's head inflated by an air pump,without evidence of any such appliance in the immediate vicinity. Cipramil, an alternative SSRI, does not produce this spaceman sensation, when my dosage is reduced.

This was later followed by a comment left by someone whom I think is a general practitioner from Heacham Group Practice...

At last a recognition of what most general practitioners and community mental health workers have recognised for some time; withdrawal from paroxetine is much more likely than other SSRI's to produce a characteristic and often severe syndrome. We belief that the figure is considerably higher than the 7% quoted. Paroxetine is, however, an extremely effective and useful drug, and what should now follow is a wide debate, (with appropriate research), to address the following questions;-

1)How common is the withdrawal syndrome?
2)In what proportion of patients is it severe?
3)What regime should be used for withdrawing the drug?
4)How is the syndrome best treated, other than re- starting paroxetine, e.g. should an alternative SSRI be used?
5)Are there particular patient characteristics which predispose them to the syndrome?

Failing satisfactory answers to these questions will inevitably lead to the substitution of alternative therapies.

Alfonso Carvajal, a clinical pharmacologist from Spain adds...

In fact, I think withdrawal symptoms with paroxetine are more frequent, more severe and more difficult to treat than currently believed. I have tried to stop paroxetine in a female patient by reducing the dose during a long period: three weeks on a 3/4 of the current dose (20 mg); three weeks on 1/2 and, finally, other three weeks on 1/4. After finishing the medication, symtoms have appeared, being the more prominents insomnia, bad dreams and restlesness. It is worrisome that these symptoms resemble those of depression. I agree that it is necessary to find out better strategies to stop this medication but important as well, to have into account, before starting this medication, the appearence of a difficult to treat withdrawal syndrome.

A heartfelt response from Dawn Rider of the United States followed with...

I am encouraged to finally see the FDA take action on this extremely urgent matter. I have been communicating with hundreds of people across the United States and throughout Europe who have been attempting to warn the public about the dangers of not only Paroxetine, but other SSRI/SNRI drugs.

These are people who were prescribed Paroxetine (or one of the other SSRI/SNRI drugs), without any warning of the addictive nature, or severe side effects upon withdrawal that all too often accompany these drugs.

I can only hope that similar action will be taken against all drugs that are within the SSRI/SNRI classification of drugs. The population so adversely affected by these drugs may appear to be nominal when written up as a percentage in the drug labeling insert, but in reality- with so many now being prescribed these new "wonder" drugs for everything from mild depression to PMS, there are millions now using these drugs, most without proper follow up care. The "small percentage" factor now translates into thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands who are so adversely affected.

I know from personal experience. I have never taken any of these drugs, but we lost our fourteen year old son to suicide, which I firmly believe was brought on by his own adverse reaction to Prozac, and I have watched my husband suffer terribly in attempting to withdraw from Paxil. I would venture to guess that those who are adversely affected by these drugs are much higher than even the 7-10% that is now being proposed.

I encourage you to investigate further into the hundreds of thousands of other "anecdotal" evidences from those using the other SSRI/SNRI drugs. If you don't take the responsibility to do this now, the reality will manifest itself, as has been the case with Paroxetine. There are simply too many people now who are beginning to realize that they were denied the opportunity of "Informed Clinical Consent". These people are not laboratory rats who should be subjected to such experimentation. Listen to what they have to say!

Oh, and one more thing, until there is absolute proof positive that one has a "serotonin imbalance", it would be best if this theory ceased to be pushed upon the public as fact. Until there is a method in place to determine what is a "normal" serotonin level in a patient, and a method to determine how much that level should be tampered with to achieve the desired results, the pharmaceutical firms should cease comparing patients diagnosed with depression, anxiety, bi-polar disorder or any other number of "mental health disorders" to those diagnosed with diabetes. You can measure the level of insulin needed to obtain the correct balance needed for someone with diabetes. Not so with serotonin.


Now Mr Woods, CEO of the MHRA has a meeting with Janice Simmons from the Seroxat & SSRi User Group at the end of this month. Janice has similar emails sent in by concerned patients. I urge Kent Woods not to pass them off as anecdotal. If GP's, Consultant Physicians, Clinical Pharmacologists and Leading Experts on SSRis were complaining about withdrawal as early as 2002 then why wasn't they listened to?

The thread continues here Mr Woods. If you want to learn about withdrawal then read it. If you want to experience withdrawal may I suggest, like all good chefs, you try the product. Prove that we are wrong - show us that if you are over 25 there really is no problem withdrawing from Seroxat.

This is a problem Mr Woods, a severe problem that has been ignored for too long. Like Dawn Rider states in her reply (above) "... These people are not laboratory rats who should be subjected to such experimentation. Listen to what they have to say!"

Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

By Bob Fiddaman

ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD HERE


PAPERBACK COMING SOON

More from Paxil/Seroxat Online database

Here are more comments about Seroxat.

Taken from the online patient database - askapatient.com

----

Felt like nerve endings in anus and head were contracting for the first month, awful numbness in head, lifted my spirits but overall this drug is poison. Male 32

Only a mere 5mg/day. First 2 days: slight headache, feeling hazy and increased libido actually. 3rd day: severe depression, loss of concentration, anger, deep sadness, even suicidal thoughts weren't far. Stopped it at once(our best doc. remains ourselves) and fortunately I was(almost) back to normal the next day just some very little dizyness. Male 27

I have currenty been on this drug for over eight years and have decided that I have have had enough of sleeping for 13 hrs a day or more. When I started coming off this medicine I have been so sick. I have constant diarrhea, nausea and irritabiliy. I have this buzzing in my head. I can't stand to hear loud noises and excessive talking it drives me nuts. Female 36

Weight gain mainly, HORRIBLE withdrawl Male 51

Yawn tremors, vision difficulties, confusion, zombie-like, NO SEX DRIVE AT ALL. Female 26

No libido, constipation, weight gain, electrical zaps and swooshy sounds, suicidal ideation, rages, increased depression, agitation, the list goes on..... Male 31

Basically all side effects that are known. worse though, i got the tolerance/poop-out syndrome after a couple of years so i started withdrawing during use. withdrawal is the worst part of this poison! Male 31

COMPLETE LOSS IN SEX DRIVE! some weight gain at first, decreased effectiveness overtime, crazy dreams and night sweats, always sleepy (could sleep for 10 or more hours at a time!) Female 23

Tremors (all over body shakes, like really really bad case of the coffee jitters), insomnia--my brain was WIDE awake at 2 am--hot and cold flashes, I went from freezing cold to burning up in a matter of a minute, and when the hot flashes came, my skin felt as if it were being burned, it acted as a diuretic, made me have to go to the bathroom every ten minutes, and it made me really really nauseous. Female 35

Caused hands to tremble, perspiration/heat intolerance, brain fog, fatigue, insomnia Male 23

Excessive yawning, Dilated pupils, didnt care about things that used to bother me, I stopped obsessing over everything. The side effect that bothered me the most, was the sexual side effects. The desire was gone, completely, and inability to have an orgasm. It was horrible to not be able to have an orgasm! That was when I realized that i needed to stop taking Paxil. Female 26

Rapid weight gain, dizziness, memory loss, rapid heartbeat, loss of concentration, vertigo, nausea, decreased libido, ringing in ears, drymouth, difficulty sleeping, bad nightmares, spontaneous crying episodes Female 34

Turned into a zombie. Extremely sleepy during the day, can't fall asleep at night. Tried getting off it and experienced immense anger at everything. Short blackouts and "electric shocks" with accompanying flashes of light. Hot flushes (I'm male). Shaking, increased perspiration. Male 47

"The benefits of Seroxat far outweight the risks" - MHRA, DoH, GSK

Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

By Bob Fiddaman

ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD HERE


PAPERBACK COMING SOON

Antidepressants - An Indian Perspective

Source: The Economic Times

We've come full circle
Mythili Bhusnurmath, TNN

Early this month, Western papers were full of reports of a new study that seemed to rubbish the use of anti-depressants. Research at the University of Hull showed new-generation drugs such as Prozac and Seroxat do not relieve depression any more than dummy pills or placebos.

If anti-depressants are not the cure they are meant to be and the only ones gaining from them are drug companies, what’s the alternative therapy now being favoured by many doctors? The answer: Talking therapy! In plain language, a shoulder to cry on, ideally a qualified one, but if not, time, empathy and a willing ear.

Let’s accept it, modern-day life with its tensions means we all have our moments of self-doubt, of feeling life’s not worth living any more. Usually these are fleeting moments and more often than not, except in cases of severe depression, a caring family, a good friend, a sympathetic ear is enough to shake off the blues.

Unfortunately, the atomised lifestyle of the West, and increasingly our metros too, means no one has the time to lend you a shoulder when you are down in the dumps. Everyone is in the rat race. From kindergarten admission (as parents in metros will tell you) to high school and beyond, the pressure to perform, do one better than your neighbour, is relentless. To say time is at a premium is an under-statement; people are working more, sleeping less, spending less time with family and friends. And even when they do pause to listen, they listen with their ears, not with their hearts and that’s no use to someone who’s distressed.

In such a scenario what do you do when you are feeling low? Why, pop a pill, of course! Fortunately drug companies in India are not allowed to advertise on television but that is not the case abroad.

The drug may not actually do you any good but as anyone who has seen the seductive power of the advertisement blitzkrieg unleashed by drug companies on television overseas will vouchsafe, it’s easy to persuade yourself. After all there’s no reason why something that turned that haggard, beaten-looking man/ woman into a smiling, raring-to-go person on TV will not do the same for you. So what do you do? Reach for that bottle of pills much like many in India reach for that tube of Fair and Lovely, or should that be Fair and Handsome?

Counsellors and doctors don’t have much time either. In a world where time is money it’s so much easier to prescribe a drug than listen patiently to a person’s ills, real or imagined, and medicate as a last, not a first, resort.

The 21st century is all about the search for quick fixes. Depressed? No problem! Have a Prozac! Is your child distracted and inattentive in class? No problem! He’s probably suffering from Attention Deficit Disorder. Give him some pills. Don’t trouble yourself asking whether he/she is inattentive because the class is so boring that it does not hold the child’s attention. Whether the emphasis on rote learning means it simply does not interest a child who is inquisitive by nature (as most children are before our system of education kills their enquiring spirit). Or ask why the same child who just cannot sit still in class can sit for hours in front of a computer or a video game, lost to the world.

The answers are all there, staring us in the face but they are too disturbing. They call for patience and for time and effort, none of which most modern-day parents/teachers/doctors or counsellors have. So pop a pill; it’s so much easier. Never mind if it often implies drug-dependency for life.

Hopefully, with the publication of the study, there will now be some effort to turn the clock back. The UK government has already announced a $350 million programme to train psychotherapists who will treat an estimated one million people for depression and anxiety over the next three years. Predictably the drug industry is unhappy. If more and more people turn to old-world remedies whatever will happen to the lifestyle medicines on which the industry makes a fortune?

For us in India, there’s a message in this. Before we go whole hog the western way, pause, reconsider. Call that long-forgotten friend/family member, rethink your work-life balance and never allow drug companies to advertise on television.

Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

By Bob Fiddaman

ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD HERE


PAPERBACK COMING SOON

VIDEO FOR YOUR CONSCIENCE GSK & OTHERS

This video goes out to the following:

The Department of Health (in particular The Rt Hon Dawn Primarolo)
Gisela Stuart MP
JP Garnier Chief Executive Officer of GlaxoSmithKline
Kent Woods CEO of the MHRA
Alisdair Breckenridge Chairman of the MHRA (and former employee of GlaxoSmithKline)
Alistair Benbow Head of European Psychiatry for GlaxoSmithKline
Ian Hudson Director of Licensing at the MHRA (and former employee of GlaxoSmithKline)
June Raine Director of Post Licensing at the MHRA
Mary Anne Rhyne GlaxoSmithKline Spokeswoman
The Seroxat/Paxil Gunslingers, namely:
Dr Andrew Leon, Dr Charles Nemeroff, Dr David Dunner, Dr David Shaffer Dr Fredrick Goodwin, Dr John Mann, Dr John March, Dr John Rush Dr Martin Keller, Dr Neal Ryan, Dr Mark Olfsen, Dr Robert GibbonsDr Graham Emslie, David Stout, Dr Karen Wagner.

I'd like you all to watch this video then go about your daily business and erase the memory of the children featured within it.



Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

By Bob Fiddaman

ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD HERE


PAPERBACK COMING SOON

Coronation Street - 'Liz McDonald' memory loss when on Seroxat

...She was prescribed Seroxat, an antidepressant that increases levels of the feel-good chemical serotonin - which is often low in those with depression.


Despite her collapse and diagnosis, Beverley returned to work the next day, hoping the drug would make her feel better, although she had been warned it could be six weeks before it took effect.



'Actually, I felt worse as the weeks went on. I never forgot my lines, but an hour after a conversation, I wouldn't remember what had been said.'





FULL STORY

Uncomfortably Numb Trailer

Paxil Deaths - The Video

Seroxat group campaigner to meet PM

Source: The Hunts Post

Prime Minister Gordon Brown is to meet a woman from Huntingdon, who has been campaigning for five years to highlight potential problems with anti-depressants.

Janice Simmons set up the Seroxat User Group in 2002 after discovering that her second husband Jon was addicted to the drug.

Since then thousands of people have contacted her website and the group has provided information to people from all over the world.

Mrs Simmons, 58, a grandmother from Great Stukeley, will travel to Downing Street tomorrow (Thursday), accompanied by Huntingdon MP Jonathan Djanogly and Dr Paul Duckett, from Manchester ­University.

She told The Hunts Post: "I never believed we would get this far. Our MP, Jonathan Djanogly, wrote to Tony Blair in July and we received the invite last week."

Mrs Simmons said there is a long list of demands on their shopping list and her group wants:

* To know why - four years since it started - the investigation into GlaxoSmithKline is still ongoing. The MHRA, (the Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Agency, the body that regulates medicines), is investigating an allegation that GSK withheld information on Seroxat having a higher suicide risk for under 18s. GSK denies this, saying Seroxat was never licensed for children.

* Why a recommendation from a Health Select Committee report in 2005 - which said that the MHRA should become an independent body - has not been implemented.

* The group wants the MHRA to look at independent information about particular drugs - rather than accept information from drug companies.

* Better enforcement of guidelines from NICE (the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence) which state that anti-depressants should not be used as a first-line treatment for mild depression.

* The user group says information from its members indicates that many GPs have not heard of the MHRA or the Yellow Card warning system. This is a yellow card doctors and patients are advised to complete to report the side effects of the drugs.

Mrs Simmons set up the group after seeing the addiction of her husband.

Six years before they met, Jon and his first wife were prescribed anti-depressants when their marriage broke down. Jon's wife committed suicide within three weeks of being put on Prozac while 16 years on, Jon is still dependant on anti-depressants.

The Seroxat User Group will also remind Mr Brown that more support groups and funding are needed to help patients trying to withdraw from anti-depressants.

INFORMATION: Contact The Seroxat User Group on www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk

e-mail
janice@seroxatusergroup.org.uk


WAY TO GO JANICE :) :) :)

Word of warning though, when Brown was chancellor he appointed JP Garnier to his International Business Advisory Council - so whatever you may say to him may fall on deaf ears seeing as he is yet another politician who has close ties to GSK

Fid