Antidepressant meds and you...

Remove all ads!

Thanks, Splunge!.... Hey, wait a minute now.....

 

OK, you are right, waiters don't quite fit the category. I would define the category as, "a person paid to provide socialization beyond that which a stranger would find unacceptable, i.e., that which only a friend would provide"--priests, therapists, and whores. OK, whores probably only partly fit...perhaps 'escorts' are a more fitting occupational group.

And mental health workers are not doctors. A doctor is someone you visit to find out what is wrong. They diagnose. You don't tell them you have a slipped disk, you say, "My back hurts." Psychiatrist do not diagnose. They define categories for other people, and then assign their patient to such and such category. The patient shows up, says, "I'm sad...been sad awhile." Congrats, you've qualified for the "depressed" category. Diagnosis complete. Now for the fun hobby of sampling a wide potpourris of drugs that you yourself decide the effectiveness of. "These four aren't working, in tandem, at such and such dosage..." Wheels to spin! Baby steps! Moving...forward?

BTW, I realize there are some people that have diagnosable brain disorders, such as schizophrenia (massively reduced brain activity), or have suffered head wounds...

But...99% of "patients" do not have such ailments. Instead, they just want to pay for someone to talk to and maybe, just maybe, a way to consume themselves to being a different person (if only they can just get their meds right...)

BTW, have any of you guys ever tried a benzodiazepine? Every person ever alive is going to diagnose themselves as feeling better after consuming one.

Caustics? Can you describe that process?

And I know it's a microdose...but still...I'd rather not. Since the effect of pyschoactives is entirely self-diagnosed, can I not claim that I am being effected right now? Are you going to tell me that I am not? Why are you right and I'm wrong? Because someone else says it doesn't effect them at the level I am being exposed to...? Maybe they have been exposed to microquantities since birth (most of us here have) and have no concept of anything different...

 

It is my understanding that psychiatrists are medical doctors. You may see them as being somehow lesser than cardiologists or oncologists, and that's an opinion you have a right to, but in terms of the medical and scientific community, they have the same level of prestige, education, and authority.

Perhaps you were thinking of psychologists?

In any event, on that same note, psychiatrists DO diagnose -- they listen to the symptoms as described by the patient and then map out a treatment regiment. I can see where you're coming from in that the diagnosis can seem to be subjective, but I think you take that element of the process a little too far. All diagnoses have an element of subjectivity -- ask your GP about that and I'll bet he/she will tell you some stories!

As for the dangerous psychoactive chemicals in the water, the same argument could be made for all medicines, and it would be just as nonsensical.

 

Typically water purification is a process where the raw sewage is put in large tanks and hit with various chemicals. In a multistage process the various stages can be acidic, then neutralized and turned basic and neutralized again. Basically an acid and a base form water and a salt -- the salt is filtered out or allowed to precipitate. During the process the water is also hit with various other chemicals to destroy or complex with any organics in the water (nearly all drugs are organic in nature) -- potassium permanganate, sodium hypochlorite, and ozone are often used. Not even durable organic molecules like urea get through.

 

Hmm, I don't know. I am reading a different description of water purification, it does mention that Europe uses ozone to disinfect the water while most of America uses chlorine.

However, still, some gets through...for all drugs.

@LKD About prestige, you're wrong. How many cardiologists are there in the world? How many shrinks with M.D's? Big difference. And the amount of subjectivity involved is HUGELY different as well.

Nobody walks into a cardiologists office and demans massive quantities of highly addictive drugs because they claim to feel suicidal. Nobody walks into a cardiologists office and demands the government support them with massive quantities of highly addictive drugs as well as enough money to scrape by because the stress of existing makes them feel suicidal.

The profession of psychiatry, while perhaps mildly noble in concept (at least in a profoundly personal-boundary violating sort of way...), is in effect much more harmful to society than helpful. Removing their ability to prescribe drugs would go a FAR way towards fixing that problem.

Seriously, again, have you guys ever taken a benzo? Do you really think they should be legal?

 

Funnily enough, moods, like depression, can be strongly correlated to the levels of neurotransmitters in the brain like serotonin, norepinephrine and GABA (benzodiazepines work because they enhance the inhibitory effect of GABA.) Pills work with depression because they enhance or inhibit various neurotransmitters that are strongly correlated to depression, for example Prozac works because it enhances the effect of serotonin by blocking the reuptake of that transmitter. Depression can be caused by a physical cause, just like schizophrenia, and can be seen as a diagnosable brain disorder. I don't know what your source is on the "massively reduced brain activity", there is reduced brain activity in the prefontal cortex, but schizophrenia is more often associated with a complicate imbalance of the dopamine transmitter in various brain areas.

But hey, don't take my word for it though! Just check of the 100+ years worth of literature on the connection between the brain and the mind.

I don't think cardiologists are trained to deal with suicidal people... (?) Perhaps only with the people who stab themselves in the heart, but I don't think those people are then capable of demanding for highly addictive pills....

 

My point was that they are both medical doctors, despite your assertion to the contrary. And as for your question, are you referring to surgeons? Because I don't have access to the statistics that you are seemingly using to determine that there are different numbers of cardiologists in the world than psychiatrists -- I fail to see what difference that makes to the discussion at hand. Tell you what, find me some quotes from medical specialists in one field trashing psychiatry and I'll get back to you. My guess is that most doctors who have been to med school will say that psychiatry is just another branch of medicine, not a "lesser" one.

 

I am impressed. You're right that I didn't know what the true names of cancer drugs are, but when I read you examples I assumed that they were real names of cancer drugs.

You may be surpsrised to learn that cardiologists and psychiatrists go to the same medical schools. They don't have different medical schools for different types of MDs (psychiatrists are not like optomitrists or pediatrists who do NOT go to medical school). ALL doctors go through the same four year medical school in the US, and after those four years you go on to further education in your area of specialization during your internship and residency.

 

I'm not quite sure what to think of depression as such, I certainly agree that they are serious illnesses, but on the other hand I think there's usually some social issues involved that can't be cured by medication. Without any better prior knowledge I'd say that people with high stress levels and low levels of social networks are much more prone to depression and other disorders. I had a close friend some years ago who was quite seriously depressed and I didn't exactly handle her condition well and lacked in understanding, but I still think that all behaviour and mood swings can't be put on the illness and the people close to such a person can't be expected to tolerate constant misbehaviour due to mental disorders.

 

Indeed...here: Social relationships and health (hope the link works)

We know popping pills isn't the cure, but I'm sure it might help...

The funny thing is that the people around a person who's depressed might even be considered as the cause for the depression.

Of course going too far along these lines would more likely get one a diagnose of a paranoid schizophrenia...and the funny thing about paranoid schizophrenics is "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you." Or, with depression, just because you're depressed doesn't mean one wouldn't have any reason to be all doom and gloom...

 

I've taken benzos. Today, in fact.

I find myself beset by anxiety, and since taking that out on my friends leads very quickly to not having friends, I take benzos to calm myself down.

Thing is, I do think they should be legal. I do not see any reason to make 'em illegal - I've heard of addiction when taken frequently, but I've never taken them frequently enough to get addicted.

And I do actually feel much the same about "therapists, priests and whores". I highly doubt a therapist could help in my case - and I do agree on social relationships being important to mental health, and no therapist can help you there. Knowing someone pretends to be friendly only because their paycheck says so means they're not much help in some crucial respects.

And everyone who knows me also knows why I'm lacking in friends.

But the truth is - in my previous, depressed state, making - nevermind keeping - friends would be a task so monumental "herculean" doesn't quite cut it. Medicated, I'm still not pleasant to be around but at the very least I'm not a raving loon one moment and so sad I'd put any emo kid to shame with melodrama the next - nor am I always thinking the worst about people.

There's rather simply no way for me to have recovered this much without medications - I was unbearable to be around, which led to crippling loneliness, and no amount of therapy or introspection will fix "people simply don't care about you and would rather you went away".

Medication can oftentimes be the only way short of a bona fide miracle to cut a downward spiral even when you don't have a chemical imbalance - and when they do, without medication a depressed person can oftentimes sabotage their own recovery without even realizing it or being able to help it.

 

My father, my wife, my classes in the subject (no degree), and a brief (one summer) internship with a psychology professor/researcher in high school. I count myself as beyond layman in psychology, but no professional, don't worry.

That's a good point, and it's not just the physical abuse. Even though most psychological disorders don't result in violence or abuse of any kind, the ones that do make the news, and that's what everyone thinks of when someone talks about a disorder.

There's also the fact that, while most everyone's body is basically the same (more or less), different people's mental landscapes can be wildly different. If you went into a diagnosis for a diseased patient not being sure what a normal blood pressure was, or a normal saline level, or temperature, or heartbeat, only knowing that those things all need to be there, then you'd be closer.

The biggest difference for psychology (not psychiatry, but psychology at least) is that the friend isn't just payed, but also trained. Not all are good, mind you, or ethical. They do, however, know a lot more about what can go right, what can go wrong, how to tell the difference, and how to guide someone from one to the other, than anyone else.

And a good psychologist will recognize this, and may even guide the patient to do those things, though only after a long and careful analysis of the situation. Major life changes can actually be a critical part of psychotherapy in some cases. As for pill popping, that's the difference between a psychologist and a psychiatrist. Psychologists are trained in how you think, while psychiatrists are more trained in brain chemistry and how the brain works. You should always start with a psychologist, because they're more trained to distinguish between psychological and physiological problems (though some may have both, and others may still see benefit from the other). A psychiatrist is more prone to solve the problem with drugs, and should be reffered to by the psychologist. Think of the psychologist as the GP and the psychiatrist as a specialist.

That's... quite an assumption, and not defendable through the current professional definitions (of course, there isn't a psychological definition for crazy or insane, rather a legal one).

Not always. Chronic depression acts no matter what relationships you have. Some can exacerbate it, but none can remove it. Only drugs or ECT can.

Again, you don't really know what you're talking about here. The vast majority of the drugs that get into your drinking water are from people who flushed rather than taking, and there's plenty more in there than psychopharmaceuticals. You're drinking estrogen, too! And testosterone. And other stuff.

Well, psychologists do more diagnostics than psychiatrists, but beyond that you have no idea what you're talking about. First off, a psychiatrist is a doctor (seriously, they have to earn the MD and then go to psychology school). Secondly, the two (an MD's diagnosis and a psychological diagnosis) really are equatable. Unless you know how to recognize the signs of a psychotic break, schizophrenia, neurosis, Munchausen, manic depression, or any of the thousands of other disorders that make it into the DSM, and how to treat them, then you may need a psychologist at some point. And if you do know all that stuff, then congratulations on earning your degree in psychology.

As for your poor analogy of "I'm sad", you missed the rest of the conversation:
Psy: "Why are you sad?"
You: "My father died. He meant a lot to me."
Psy: "Congratulations, you're grieving. Here's a pamphlet, go home and read it. You'll be fine."

Or, the conversation could go like this:
Psy: "Why are you sad?"
You: "I don't know. I've got a great job, lots of money, a beautiful, loving wife, two great kids, a huge house. My life is great, but I'm sad. I feel like it's all a show, like my wife is only with me out of pity, or like my kids really despise me."
Psy: "... Let's talk some more." (the real diagnosis beings here)

... Yeah, that's not schizophrenia. Not even close.

Spoiler

Diagnostic criteria for Schizophrenia:
A. Characteristic symptoms: Two (or more) of the following, each present for a significant portion of time during a 1-month period (or less if successfully treated):

delusions
hallucinations
disorganized speech (e.g., frequent derailment or incoherence)
grossly disorganized or catatonic behavior
negative symptoms, i.e., affective flattening, alogia, or avolition
Note: Only one Criterion A symptom is required if delusions are bizarre or hallucinations consist of a voice keeping up a running commentary on the person's behavior or thoughts, or two or more voices conversing with each other.

B. Social/occupational dysfunction: For a significant portion of the time since the onset of the disturbance, one or more major areas of functioning such as work, interpersonal relations, or self-care are markedly below the level achieved prior to the onset (or when the onset is in childhood or adolescence, failure to achieve expected level of interpersonal, academic, or occupational achievement).

C. Duration: Continuous signs of the disturbance persist for at least 6 months. This 6-month period must include at least 1 month of symptoms (or less if successfully treated) that meet Criterion A (i.e., active-phase symptoms) and may include periods of prodromal or residual symptoms. During these prodromal or residual periods, the signs of the disturbance may be manifested by only negative symptoms or two or more symptoms listed in Criterion A present in an attenuated form (e.g., odd beliefs, unusual perceptual experiences).

D. Schizoaffective and Mood Disorder exclusion: Schizoaffective Disorder and Mood Disorder With Psychotic Features have been ruled out because either (1) no Major Depressive Episode, Manic Episode, or Mixed Episode have occurred concurrently with the active-phase symptoms; or (2) if mood episodes have occurred during active-phase symptoms, their total duration has been brief relative to the duration of the active and residual periods.

E. Substance/general medical condition exclusion: The disturbance is not due to the direct physiological effects of a substance (e.g., a drug of abuse, a medication) or a general medical condition.

F. Relationship to a Pervasive Developmental Disorder: If there is a history of Autistic Disorder or another Pervasive Developmental Disorder, the additional diagnosis of Schizophrenia is made only if prominent delusions or hallucinations are also present for at least a month (or less if successfully treated).

Subtypes
1. Paranoid Type

A type of Schizophrenia in which the following criteria are met:

Preoccupation with one or more delusions or frequent auditory hallucinations.
None of the following is prominent: disorganized speech, disorganized or catatonic behavior, or flat or inappropriate affect.
2. Catatonic Type

A type of Schizophrenia in which the clinical picture is dominated by at least two of the following:

motoric immobility as evidenced by catalepsy (including waxy flexibility) or stupor
excessive motor activity (that is apparently purposeless and not influenced by external stimuli)
extreme negativism (an apparently motiveless resistance to all instructions or maintenance of a rigid posture against attempts to be moved) or mutism
peculiarities of voluntary movement as evidenced by posturing (voluntary assumption of inappropriate or bizarre postures),
stereotyped movements, prominent mannerisms, or prominent grimacing
echolalia or echopraxia
3. Disorganized Type

A type of Schizophrenia in which the following criteria are met:

All of the following are prominent:
disorganized speech
disorganized behavior
flat or inappropriate affect
The criteria are not met for Catatonic Type.
4. Undifferentiated Type

A type of Schizophrenia in which symptoms that meet Criterion A are present, but the criteria are not met for the Paranoid, Disorganized, or Catatonic Type.

5. Residual Type

A type of Schizophrenia in which the following criteria are met:

Absence of prominent delusions, hallucinations, disorganized speech, and grossly disorganized or catatonic behavior.
There is continuing evidence of the disturbance, as indicated by the presence of negative symptoms or two or more symptoms listed in Criterion A for Schizophrenia, present in an attenuated form (e.g., odd beliefs, unusual perceptual experiences).
Associated features
Learning Problem
Hypoactivity
Psychosis
Euphoric Mood
Depressed Mood
Somatic or Sexual Dysfunction
Hyperactivity
Guilt or Obsession
Sexually Deviant Behavior
Odd/Eccentric or Suspicious Personality
Anxious or Fearful or Dependent Personality
Dramatic or Erratic or Antisocial Personality

Spoiler

Diagnostic criteria for Catatonia:
According to the DSM-IV, the "With catatonic features" specifier can be applied if the clinical picture is dominated by at least two of the following:

motor immobility as evidenced by catalepsy (including waxy flexibility) or stupor
excessive motor activity (purposeless, not influenced by external stimuli)
extreme negativism (motiveless resistance to all instructions or maintenance of a rigid posture against attempts to be moved) or mutism
peculiarities of voluntary movement as evidenced by posturing, stereotyped movements, prominent mannerisms, or prominent grimacing
echolalia or echopraxia
[edit] Subtypes
Stupor is a motionless, apathetic state in which one is oblivious or does not react to external stimuli. Motor activity is nearly non-existent. Individuals in this state make little or no eye contact with others and may be mute and rigid. One might remain in one position for a long period of time, and then go directly to another position immediately after the first position.

Catatonic excitement is a state of constant purposeless agitation and excitation. Individuals in this state are extremely hyperactive, although the activity seems to lack purpose.

Fink and Taylor developed a catatonia rating scale to identify the syndrome. [5] A diagnosis is verified by a benzodiazepine or barbiturate test. The diagnosis is validated by the quick response to either benzodizepines or electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). While useful in the past, barbiturates are no longer commonly used in psychiatry; thus the option of either benzodiazepines or ECT.

Provide some defense for that statistic and I may start taking you seriously.

Again, you don't seem to understand how psychological treatment works. The issue isn't "are you feeling better", but "was there a problem then, that is gone now". If you were feeling fine, but now feel great, you're high, not better. If you were feeling suicidal/homicidal, and now don't, then you're better.

There are a couple of options, though they're really centered around removing bacteria and viruses, not chemicals. The most popular (around here) seem to be either massive UV treatment or a chlorine bath (the chlorine gets removed afterward).

Even that's a very simplified description. You aren't talking about settling, or organic nutrient removal, or any of the dozens of filtration processes. Still, Thinker's right that some drugs get through. They're usually the very complex ones (urea's actually pretty simple).

Have you ever tried Morphine? Or, for that matter, most any other serious pain medication out there? They're just as powerful, if not moreso. They should be legal, but controlled.

I think what you're really having a problem with is the way some in modern society (and it actually isn't even that large of a portion) treat psychology and psychopharmaceuticals. You're talking about the "quick fix" crowd here.

 

Really? (I'm asking that as a serious question - I'd really like the hear more about this, as I have no formal training in psychology.) Wouldn't most people have pretty similar "mental landscapes" as well? I would think that just like people who are not suffering from any physical issues have pretty similar bodies, that people who are not suffering from any mental issues would have pretty similar minds. Are you saying this is not so? If it is not so, how do we know it is not so? It seems like if two people (we can use you and me as an example here) are not suffering any mental health issues, how could we even tell if we had different "mental landscapes"?

 

Hello all at SP ... sorry to intrude here but this discussion is very interesting.

IMO, very simply, most points of view that dismisses experiential claims from someone else as illegitimate are derived from a lack of understanding of, or familiarity with, the claimed experience, and thus they cannot be considered 'informed.' This is commonly seen in the "suck it up" recommendation made to depressed persons. The person making the recommendation does not know on an experiential level what the depressed person is going through and bases their solution to the problem on how they themselves would handle other problems.

Other, more generic problems - typical difficulties that we all experience day to day - are often addressed successfully by simple determination. Got a flat tire? It won't do you any good to complain about it, so suck it up and change the tire. Having problems at work or school or home? Bear down and focus on what you can control - put forth the necessary effort to overcome the issues. Etcetera.

The assumption tends to be that the same determination or will-power that allows them to overcome these problems can be applied by depressed persons to overcome their issues, but they fail to recognize the connection that for genuinely depressed persons, the tools are not there. Try changing that flat tire without hands; try solving your home, work, or school problems without being able to focus your concentration for more than 30 seconds at a time.

I expect that the reaction to this would still be "bullcrap, you can do anything you put your mind to," and that might be partly correct: you can do anything you put your mind to. But you're not depressed. And until such time as you become familar on a personal level with the struggles depressed people endure (and god forbid you should ever have to), you should withhold judgement.

And btw, having the blues or going through a rough patch or feeling generally unmotivated does not necessarily equal depression, so claims that "I went through a rough patch and got through it with stubborn determination" don't really count either. We all run into those things from time to time, but not eveybody who does is depressed. So your solution may not apply.

Sorry if any of this sounds preachy - I don't really mean it that way.

 

No need to go that far, dude. I have a pair of good strong hands, but even I can't change a tire without some sort of wrench. No need to go taking people's hands away, now.

 

Welcome to Gaear -- let's all give him a hand for his post!

Jokes like that lighten the mood and reduce depression. You can all thank me by sending me money.

 

<_<
>_>

Hey....wait a minute! You B@*%$%#s hijacked my thread!
I demand that it be given back immediately!

Seriously though, this thread was supposed to be more of a "This is what I'm going through...what are your personal experiences with such things" thread. Not an endless argument over what kind of doctor is a hack, or which cardiologist is sleeping with cancer survivors who are addicted to drugs that don't exist....

 

Most psychologists/psychiatrists get into the field because they are interested in it. The two that I have had genuinely cared to listen - the good doctors care about their patients. So no, they are not being friendly only because their paycheck demands it, they are being friendly because they truly want to help. Next time you meet a psychologist, ask him/her why they do it.

 

Sorry, Kit. Let me sum up my experience with the whole deal:

The meds helped. They did not solve the problem, they were a factor in the solution of the problem. I spoke with several mental health professionals. Some were excellent, some were douchebags, just like in every other segment of the human population. The excellent ones helped me in ways that good friends did not have the training, expertise, experience or knowledge to do.

None of them slept with me or offered me any drugs that do not exist.

 

Ah, personal experiences...

Well...No-ones admitted me any meds. And yes, as far as DSM-IV goes, heck I've had my Major Depressive Episode(s). Though, since I'm not a doc, I can't diagnose myself...as long as I'm saying to the docs what my problem is, it's not a problem. The problem is anything else since a) I'm not qualified to make a psychiatric evaluation and b) you're not bat-dung-fornicating-crazy if you think you're a loon, but apparently behave like a normal healthy person in front of the doc, but you are nuts if you claim not to be and do crazy poo.

Most likely a person claiming a specific illness, even a psychiatric disorder, is suffering from hypocondriasis, especially if the person describes the symptoms in a way that would suggest that the person has read a description of the symptoms from a source of medical information.

It is ironic that one should almost willingly start to act in a manner that would suggest a mental breakdown if one has read too much of medical information. Doctors are proud things, if you're stepping on their turf of their very own special field of knowledge...well, they won't like you too much...statistically speaking of course...or should I say clinically speaking? Not each and every doc's a proud d...ouche (like a couple of my cousins are) but it would seem that subjecting oneself for a specialized field of education, such as medicine, highly increases the risk of getting a Narcissistic personality disorder...

But hey, I'm still not a doc, so I'm just flapping my gums here in the breeze...of course it is rather ironic that I claim that something's not quite right with my head, a few docs say that there's nothing to worry about, but as I persist on proper examination and they find a frigging tumor in my noggin about the size of a half of a tennis ball...well. There's still nothing wrong! Whoop-de-doo! There's no connection with the reasons why I went to check my head and the tumor! None! And why? Because there can't be since I'm the one claiming that I had problems and they have to deny it since I'm not qualified to make that judgement! They'd have actually have to get down from their pedestal and admit that, yes, six medical professionals and a f***ing committee of psychiatrists evaluating the case might actually have been wrong not to mention that it would mean that a layman been right about his damn issues and that that he has them in the first place!

So no, I'm not going to have anything to do with any damn shrink anymore. They can stuff their meds where the sun don't shine...last century an enema was on of the greatest cures for a score of mental ailments. I'd suggest the docs to cure themselves and stuff it for that matter...