Antidepressant Destruction in London

I'm just back from London, well, not just back - I arrived home yesterday after spending the night in Kensington and an afternoon in Harlesden, which is in the London district of Brent, ironically just a few miles from the cesspit that is GlaxoSmithKline HQ.

I think it's safe to call it a cesspit given the stench emanating from its bowels this century.

So, why had I travelled to London? Well, there's a new kid on the block, she has just launched her new book, The Pill That Steals Lives, I wrote a review for the book here.

Katinka "Tinks" Newman is, by trade, a documentary filmmaker. She's now a published author too - her story of antidepressant induced violence and psychosis an all too familiar one.

Tinks held her book launch at the Waterstones book store in Kensington on Tuesday evening. I travelled the tube from Earls Court along with long time friends Leonie, Tony, Brian and his lovely wife. Brian runs the antidepaware website - More about this later.

Upon arrival at Waterstones we were greeted with many familiar faces. Another long time friend of mine, who for many years has remained anonymous via his online blog, Seroxat Secrets, was also there - his own review of the launch can be read here.

I met Olga, a charming woman from Holland. Olga lost her daughter in a bus crash in Sierre in 2012. The driver of that bus, Geert Michiels, had traces of Seroxat in his system and a subsequent investigation into the crash found that he had deliberately mounted a pavement in a tunnel and crashed the bus head-on into a wall. There were 52 on board, 28 people perished, 22 of them were children. The other 24 pupils, all aged between 10 and 12, were injured, including three who were hospitalized with severe brain and chest injuries. (Back story).

I really wish I could have spoken more with Olga and her husband but as things are at these types of gatherings more and more people introduce themselves.

Steph Lynch and I.

Next up was Stephanie Lynch and her husband John. Their son, Jake, was just 14 when he took a gun to his mouth and shot himself to death. Jake had been prescribed Prozac after a 10 minute consultation with a psychiatrist. There was no diagnosis made. Jake was prescribed Prozac because he was anxious about up-and-coming school exams. (Back story)

Kirk Brandon was next. Kirk and I became friends a few years ago now and we met previously in Birmingham when he was touring with his band. For those that don't know, Kirk formed post punk new wave band Theatre of Hate back in 1980 and has since enjoyed success both as a solo artist and by forming other bands. Kirk was prescribed Seroxat - Kirk suffered severe psychosis as a result of ingesting Seroxat.

Tinks reads an extract from her book, 'The Pill That Steals Lives'

After the launch some of us headed to Bill's Burger bar just down the street from Waterstones. Food, conversation and great company. I arrived back at my hotel in West Kensington after midnight and slept like a baby.


Day Two

Look who's here - It's those pesky Panorama people again!

Tinks, as I mentioned above, is, first and foremost, a documentary filmmaker and has made many films for the BBC in Documentary Features and in News and Current Affairs.

On the back of her book she has now been commissioned by the BBC to make a documentary about antidepressant induced violence and homicide, prescripticide, if you will.

This isn't the first time Panorama have covered antidepressants. They have previously aired four special documentaries about Seroxat, all of which are available here.

To my joy both the cameraman and sound guy had previously worked on the Seroxat documentaries and we had an interesting discussion about the individuals who featured in those series of programmes.

Cameras roll. The Panorama film crew filming us during lunch - Photo taken by Leonie.

We sat around a colourful table at Katinka's house in Brent and basically just talked naturally about our experiences on the various drugs. Leonie spoke eloquently of her son, Shane, who was prescribed citalopram after the break-up of his relationship with his girlfriend. Shane, after citalopram induced psychosis, killed a young man then himself and Leonie has been campaigning since.

Brian of antidepaware and his wife sadly couldn't make lunch at Katinka's.

Brian's website, to me at least, is a welcome addition to the fight in creating awareness and holding people accountable. Brian and his wife lost their son in 2009. He had never been depressed in his life, went to see a doctor over insomnia caused by temporary work-related stress. He was prescribed citalopram, and within days he had taken his life.

Brian has a list of UK inquest reports from 2003 - to present, all of which mention the use of antidepressants, the majority of which have resulted in coroners concluding the death was suicide. It's an important website and yet another angle to come from when trying to seek the truth. Coroners, just as much as drug regulators and the mainstream press, need to seriously wake up and see what is in front of them. They need to give the dead a voice so future generations can be, at the very least, warned how some people can have a severe reaction to antidepressant use; namely completed suicide. Katinka talks about the 'defective genes' in her book.

Also missing from the lunch was Australian author Rebekah "Becks" Beddoe (Dying for a Cure). Becks had travelled over a few days before but had to travel back unexpectedly for family reasons.

All in all it was two days spent with remarkable people, each with their own heart-wrenching stories. Tears, laughter and strong friendships were born. I love them all ~ There was a lot of pain felt in the room but this was enshrouded with an overwhelming presence of love. I'd like to think that those who have passed were present in the room too, offering us all their guidance and love.

It's something that will remain with me forever.

Thanks Tinks for making it happen.

Leonie, Steph and I. (Three caged monkeys)
SEE NO EVIL, HEAR NO EVIL, TELL NO EVIL.

We see it - we hear it - we tell it!

Bob Fiddaman.

Prescription Drugs: Who Do We Blame?

After reading Katinka Newman's new book, 'The Pill That Steals Lives' in just under 5 hours it left me with many burning questions, one above all has plagued me for some time, namely; who is responsible?

Who do we, the consumer of psychiatric medication, point the finger of blame at when it's the drug that causes the problems? We are tossed the line that we should have read the patient information leaflet regarding the side effects that these drugs "may" cause, ergo the responsibility lays firmly on our shoulders.

When questioned about a possible drug reaction many doctors, who remember have studied hard to get where they are, often dismiss our claims, opting instead to add yet more medications into the mix to try and fix the problem caused by their original prescription, all the time the doctor assumes he is trying to fix a problem in the patient's head rather than the idea he/she came up with in his/her head that the patient has some form of mental disorder. If they stood back, or stepped out of their bubble occasionally they would see that their original diagnosis was made upon guess work rather than actual scientific evaluation.

The British drug regulator, the MHRA, are the referee, the umpire in what has become an uneven match between patient and healthcare professional. Sadly, the MHRA are limp-wristed, nae powerless to intervene when they see obvious adverse reactions to medications. What is the point of having a regulator in place who are a; scared of their own shadow when it comes to reprimanding, and b; powerless?

The MHRA are pretty good at one thing but it does not involve the drugs you and I are prescribed by healthcare professionals. They are the self appointed masters of controlling fake drugs that slip into the market by way of back street sellers or, more popularly, internet websites promising cheap Viagra.

Where they fail on a grand scale is regulating the drugs dispensed by pharmacists on the so-say of a prescription written by a professional.

The MHRA have, for many years, proudly boasted about the adverse event reporting system they have in place, they call it the Yellow Card Reporting System - it's basically a flawed system whereby professionals and patients fill in a card and list what they think the drug in question may have caused, be that a skin rash or a major psychotic episode. What the MHRA do is add these reports to a database - they don't, as one would expect, go out and visit the professional or patient making these claims. Adding it to a database seems to be the only thing that they do - one has to ask how they see this as regulating and safeguarding human health?

Then we have the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture these medications - more often than not these days they are making out-of-court settlements with consumers affected by their products. No admission of guilt and a licence to continue promoting and selling the very same drugs they have recently paid out millions in compensation to victims of the said drugs. It's a lucrative way to run a business and one which only pharmaceutical companies can get away with.

Imagine for one minute that your small business made a product that made people ill or, worse still, killed them, do you really think that you, as CEO of your small business, would be able to 'buy off' those injured or the families of the deceased?

This is exactly what pharmaceutical companies do and it's something that we have just learned to accept, pretty much in the same way that we have learned to accept that some drugs may harm some people.

We accept this in an almost shrug of the shoulders fashion - it is what it is. We are so blazè with our attitudes in much the same way that prescribing professionals, the MHRA and pharmaceutical companies are - this really needs to change. Our apathetic attitude is playing into the hands of those who cook, who oversee the cooks, and finally those who spoon feed us in the form of a prescription.

I, of course, and not speaking for everyone here. There are many advocates out there that have been calling for changes regarding the way in which we are prescribed mind-altering drugs on the whim of someone's belief that losing your home or a failed marriage equates to a tennis ball sized tumorous growth inside your head, a growth that needs slowing down.

Depression, we are told, should be talked about, it should not be a taboo subject. I've often wondered if it was marketing teams involved with pharmaceutical companies that came up with the taboo line in efforts to get people talking about product a,b, or c.

The behaviour of pro-antidepressant psychiatrists has become laughable. Just a quick glance at some of the newer disorders that have appeared over the years is quite comical, yet tragic in equal measures.

Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Conduct Disorder, Disorder of Written Expression, Expressive Language Disorder, Mathematics Disorder, Oppositional Defiant Disorder Reading Disorder, Rumination Disorder ~ and these are just childhood disorders!

Tell a prescribing psychiatrist that he just may have misdiagnosed you and you will witness something borne by his profession, namely Delusional Disorder, an apparent disorder by which the individual experiences the presence of either bizarre or non-bizarre delusions which have persisted for at least one month. - In your shrink's case - the delusion is that he believes he can see inside your brain and know exactly what disease you have going on inside there. He needs no medical device - he can just tell based upon answers you give him.

Meantime, the pharmaceutical companies have a vast selection of pills to treat the invisible disease inside your head, the one that your psychiatrist found by staring at you as you gave him answers to questions. The MHRA are busy busting Joe Bloggs for selling Viagra pills out the back of his van - they don't really care much for the pills you've been prescribed for an illness that you haven't got.

All of the above provide us with their credentials - it keeps them on top of the pile and us where they think we belong ~ at the bottom with our begging bowls (Please sir, can I have some more?) - and more they give us ~ and the more we succumb to life itself.

And so the cycle continues...


Bob Fiddaman

Seroxat Withdrawal Woes Continue for British Patients

Despite Glaxo denying that there's any real problem with getting off their antidepressant, Seroxat, many patients are still struggling to do just that.

What do Glaxo do about it?

Nothing.

What about the British drug regulator, the MHRA?

Nothing.

So, it's left to support groups created, in the main, by former sufferers of Seroxat withdrawal. One such support group is Paxil Paroxetine, Seroxat..The truth in getting off safely, a Facebook group where over 1,000 sufferers of Seroxat withdrawal write about their daily plight, a plight which both GlaxoSmithKline and the MHRA ignore. How caring they both are!

The group was created by two former Seroxat users, one of whom is still on Seroxat, he is still, after 14 years, trying to withdraw. The other, a former nurse, slow tapered for 56 months (almost 5 years) to get off just 20 mg of Glaxo's powerful antidepressant.

GlaxoSmithKline will have no doubt seen the comments, they will have, no doubt, cringed at some of the tales on there but, as is the norm, they will have also ignored them and classed them merely as "anecdotal evidence". Same can be said for the MHRA.

In the meantime, it's patients helping patients because the manufacturer and those responsible for regulating the product that comes from the manufacturer are too busy burying their heads in the sand over the whole Seroxat addiction issue. Hardly surprising, given that the current CEO of the British drug regulator is the former World Safety Officer for GSK. I mean, if they acknowledge a problem now then questions will be asked why they missed the problem years ago, right?

Here's a selection of reader comments from the Facebook support group, each one being accompanied by support and advice. Something neither GlaxoSmithKline nor the MHRA offer.

Coming off of this drug is absolutely horrendous. Any change in dosage and it's like I fall into the fiery depths of withdrawal. I have a husband who is trying his best to be supportive, and 4 beautiful boys that can't understand why mommy is so sick, and so angry. I'm trying my best to get through this, and praying God doesn't make me suffer long. This is absolutely miserable.

After dropping too much too fast in December/January --9mg down to 7mg then down to 5 mg , and withdrawal hitting hard last week-I up-dosed to my last stable dose last Friday (went back to 9 mg). By later Saturday and Sunday I was feeling quite better. Then Monday came and I was terrible again and still am. Nausea, vomiting, racing inside, ruminating thoughts, can't regulate body temp, flushing with any bit of stress, extreme crying spells, agitation, etc.

I was on Seroxat for 12 years, I did some awful things to myself whilst I was on it, I came off it only because I was pregnant with my son and it would have caused serious harm to him, which I found out 3 months into my pregnancy. The withdrawal was awful I had to go onto liquid form it was one of the hardest things I have ever done.

I've been taking Seroxat for 17/18 years. I have been trying for years to come off it, by using the suspension liquid form. Reducing it by 1 ml has given me the shakes in the past. I managed to get down to just 1.5mls using a syringe. 

I have dropped my dose from 40 mg to 20 mg. Been a little over a week now.  Been on it for 14 months now. Gained 40 lbs. never interested in anything anymore. So far since I dropped my dose, I get God-awful brain zaps and I'm very irritable. The insomnia is driving me and my family nuts.

Been 2 months on 10mg after tapering down. Waking up with a bad headache, not sure if from disturbed sleep because of the disturbing dreams.

As of last Wednesday I have finally tapered myself off Seroxat after 15 years. Feeling really awful. Contrast dizziness and headaches. Feeling faint all the time. Struggling to focus at work too.  Feels like I am sea-sick, drunk and hungover all at the same time.

There are many more.


GlaxoSmithKline will be defending allegations later this year in the UK that Seroxat causes serious adverse events in a number of people who take it - they claim that there is "no merit in the claims".
They had previously, via lawyers, tried to get the litigation stopped but were denied by the presiding Judge (Back story)

Contrast the above withdrawal comments with those from 2007 that appeared via an online protest petition, here, here and here and one could suggest that there are no merits in GlaxoSmithKline's defence. Let's hope, when those previously unseen documents are aired in court, that someone might see fit to open clinics for those still suffering at the hands of Glaxo's infamous antidepressant, let's hope too that Glaxo will have to foot the bill.

Groups such as "Paxil Paroxetine, Seroxat..The truth in getting off safely" should be applauded, they are doing the work (unpaid) that both Glaxo (paid) and the MHRA (paid) should be doing.




Bob Fiddaman.

MHRA: "We Now Consider This Request Closed"

It took me a while to get to the bottom of this. The MHRA are, and have always been quite vague when it comes to answering the simplest of questions put to them. None more so then when I asked a series of questions regarding their Yellow Card Reporting System. (YCRS)

For those that don't know, the YCRS is a way of reporting adverse events from the drugs you take to the British drug regulator, the MHRA. What they do with these reports has, to me at least, always remained a mystery.

A recent series of emails between myself and the MHRA leaves me somewhat perplexed, particularly as their last one to me finished with, "we now consider this case closed".

Hmm, I don't. So, where does that leave us?

My issue with the YCRS is that, I believe, it is a system designed to fail, moreover, it does not do as it suggests, ie; "Helping to make medicines safer."

After much hulabaloo of answering questions I put to them, I finally got the answer I needed. My question being, Do the MHRA actually follow up any Yellow card report sent in by the original reporter, i.e.; do they,or have they, ever contacted the patient who sent in the original yellow card?

Their reply...

"The MHRA regularly follows up Yellow Card reports with the original reporter. If permission has been given on the Yellow Card, we will contact the reporter to request any further information that we think would be helpful to enable assessment of the case."

Finally!

I followed up their reply with, what I thought, a simple question...

We seem to be getting somewhere.

The answer, however, is quite vague. Please define 'regularly' - give me some figures.

You may think I am publicly bashing the MHRA via my blog, in truth, I do when you respond with vagueness.

Can you give me actual figures, ie; how many yellow card reports have been followed up with the original reporter, you must keep a record of this, right?

Their answer left me bemused. Years ago it would have left me frustrated but I've come accustomed to such contradictory answers from the MHRA.

We do not record the number of follow-up requests that are sent out by the Agency as knowing this information does not help monitor the safety of medicines in the UK. Rather, it is the follow-up information received that is useful for assessment of a suspected Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR). This can either be in response to a request sent out by the MHRA, or follow-up information that has been spontaneously provided by the reporter.

They added the standard disclaimers and also, bizarrely, a request for money (minimum £600) if I wanted them to perform searches for "an actual figure for the total number of all Yellow Card follow-up requests that have been sent out."

Here's their full suggestion..

Therefore to provide you with an actual figure for the total number of all Yellow Card follow-up requests that have been sent out, we would be required to manually review the case folder for each individual Yellow Card report submitted to the agency.  Under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, a public body is only required to collate information that is already in a recorded form, rather than creating new information beyond basic collation. Furthermore, the agency has received over 600, 000 Yellow Card reports directly from healthcare professionals and members of the public to date, with approximately 16,500 Yellow Cards reported a year. The staff time and cost of extracting the requested information from this would far exceed the £600 limit for central government set by Section 12 of the FOI Act.

You can see my confusion. If they don't keep records of follow-up requests that are sent out then why are they asking for a minimum fee of £600 to search for records that, they have already said, don't actually exist?

Furthermore, how can they make the claim that "The MHRA regularly follows up Yellow Card reports with the original reporter", when they don't actually "record the number of follow-up requests that are sent out."

I'd like to ask them but at the foot of their final email to me they told me, "We now consider this request closed."

Ho hum.

To date, the Drug Analysis Prints on the MHRA website list the number of yellow cards submitted to them and also the nature of the events, they range from completed suicide to skin rashes. There has not, to my knowledge, been any statement from the MHRA that any prescription drug currently on the market in the UK has caused a patient to complete suicide.

This attitude, I believe, keeps poor, unsafe drugs in pharmacies and keeps the MHRA from coming under fire - remember, it is the MHRA who grant licenses to the medicines you and I take.

The MHRA recently went all 21st century on us by creating a phone app for the yellow card. I have to ask what is the point in sending in adverse reactions when they don't, and I assume, never will, blame the drug for the more severe adverse reactions, such as completed suicide, suicidal thoughts and/or self harm.

I have further requests pending that are not related to the above. I suspect, due to my asking questions to seek the truth, the MHRA will probably, sooner or later, consider those requests closed too.


Bob Fiddaman.

A Message From RxISK

Have you developed visual problems on anti-depressants, or when stopping them? RxISK.org are looking for those that have.

http://wp.rxisk.org/keeping-an-eye-on-the-ball-visual-problems-on-ssris/

Although the person in the article lists a number of visual symptoms, it is worth noting that their main problem is blurred vision and poor night-vision.

If you experience these problems, please get in touch.

We're very keen to hear from SSRI users, but we would also be happy to hear from other anti-depressant users. You don't have to be based in the UK, providing you can arrange the same testing.

We need to get this message out to as many anti-depressant users as possible. Please help us to spread the word.

Many thanks.

James Bennett (assisting RxISK.org)