These suicides are usually violent – jumping under trains, hanging, shooting, stabbing, often taking others with them, rarely leaving a note .
Unlike Jack Nicholson’s fate, in ‘One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,’ medication can, and does, worsen behaviour, so that sectioning can, and, is justified, and allows institutionalisation for life.
These institutions are now run for private profit, resulting in ever more medication, and the inevitable creation of serious psychosis .
In the seventies, Jack Nicholson, was not made insane, and, eventually, walked free, now, he would be made psychotic, a captive pharma cash cow, and a £4,000+ per week statistic for private profit.
In her book, ‘The Pill That steals Lives’, Katinka Blackford Newman, describes her own decent into madness and incarceration, after being medicated with the antidepressants escitalopram- brand name Lexapro or Cipralex- and mirtazapine.
Her own GP, had refused to medicate her for depression, during her stressful divorce ,but she had, unfortunately, then spent a few hundred pounds on a 20 minute private psychiatric consultant ,who diagnosed depression, and gave her a private prescription.
Katinka went into a four day toxic delirium, thought she had killed her children, lacerated her arm with a kitchen knife, but remembered nothing about that incident.
Having private insurance, she admitted herself to one of the most expensive hospitals in the country, at £6,000 per week, and was fine, after her insistence, she be taken off escitalopram, but then failed to convince the psychiatrists, that this drug alone, had been her problem, and was diagnosed as a ‘psychotic depressive’, a rare naturally occuring condition, and medicated with a cocktail of ever more anti psychotics, antidepressants, and sleeping pills.
Within three months, she needed 24 hour care and was unable to wash herself.
Luckily, her medical insurance ran out, and, on the day she had planned to commit suicide, she instead, went to St Charles NHS hospital and got herself sectioned.
As the hospital was publically funded , they removed her from all, bar one of her drugs, and within weeks she was normal again.
As the government, is now phasing out public NHS mental admissions, those affected like Katinka, as profitable commodities, will be incarcerated for life in private hospitals like St Andrews, Northampton, and community living ATUs.
Fluoxetine/Prozac, is the only antidepressant recommended for teenagers and children by NICE.
It was given to Thomas Rawnsley, and my daughter twice, producing in both, an hypnotic trance like state resulting in violent behaviour, which could not be remembered afterwards by Thomas and contributed to his sectioning.
In 1990, a report by two Harvard psychiatrists, entitled,
’ The Emergence of Intense Suicidal Preoccupation during Fluoxetine treatment’ stated;
‘We were especially surprised to witness the emergence of intense, obsessive and violent suicidal thoughts in these patients. Two patients fantasised for the first time about killing themselves with a gun and one actually placed a loaded gun to her head. One patient needed to be physically restrained to prevent self- mutilation’.
And see here, a study on the violence and agitation caused by Zoloft from the Prozac family of anti antidepressants.
1883 Phenothiazines are developed as synthetic dyes.
1934 USDA develop phenothiazines as insecticides
1949 Phenothiazines shown to hinder rope-climbing in rats.
1950 Rhone Poulenc synthesizes chlorpromazine, a phenothiazine, for use as an anaesthetic.
1954 Chlorpromazine marketed in the US as Thorazine, found to induce symptoms of Parkinson’s disease.
1955 Chlorpromazine said to induce symptoms similar to encephalitis lethargica.
1959 First reports of permanent motor dysfunction linked to neuroleptics, later named tardive dyskinesia
1960 French physicians describe a potentially fatal toxic reaction to neurocepltics later named neurocelpetic malignant syndrome.
1962 California Mental Hygiene Department determines that chlorpromazine and other neuroleptics prolong hospitalisation.
1964 Neuroleptics found to impair learning in animals and humans.
1965 A one year follow up of NIMH collaborative study finds drug treated patients more likely than placebo patients to be rehospitalised .
1968 In a drug withrawal study NIMH find a direct relationship between relapse rates and dosage. The higher the dosage patients were on before withdrawal, the higher the relapse rate.
1972 Tardive dyskinesia is said to resemble Huntington’s disease, or ‘postencephalitic brain damage’
1974 Boston researchers report relapse rates are lower in pre- neuroleptic era. And drug treated patients were more likely to be socially dependent.
1977 A NIMH study, that randomised schizophrenic patients into drug and non drug, reports that only 35% of no drug patients, relapsed within a year of discharge, as opposed to 45% drugged patients.
1978 California investigator Maurice Rappaport reports markedly superior three year outcomes in patients treated without neuroleptics.
Only 27% of drug free patients relapsed in the three years following discharge, compared to 62% of drugged patients.
1978 Canadian researchers describe drug induced changes in the brain that make a patient more vulnerable to relapse, and term it ‘neuroleptic induced super sensitive psychosis’
1978 Neuroleptics found to cause 10% cellular loss in the brains of rats.
1979 Prevalence of tardive dyskinesia in drug treated patients is reported to range from 24% to 56%.
1979 Tardive dyskinesia found to be associated with cognitive impairment.
1979 Loren Mosher, chief of schizophrenia studies at NJMH, reports superior one and two year outcomes for Soteria patients treated without neuroleptics.
1980 NIMH researchers find an increase in ‘blunted effect’ and ‘emotional withdrawal’ in drug treated patients, and that neuroleptics do not improve ‘social and role performance’ in non relapsers.
1982 Anticholinergic medications used to treat Parkinsonian symptoms induced by neuroleptics reported ‘to cause cognitive impairment’
1985 Drug induced akathisia is linked to suicide.
1985 Case reports link drug induced akathisia to violent homicides
1987 Tardive dyskinesia is linked to worsening of negative symptoms, gait difficulties, speech impairment, psychological deterioration and memory deficits. They conclude it is both a ‘motor and dementing disorder’.
1992 World Health Organisation reports that schizophrenia outcomes are much superior in poor countries, where 16% of patients are kept continuously on neuroleptics.
The WHO reports that living in a developed nation is a ‘strong predictor’ that a patient will never recover.
1992 Researchers acknowledge that neuroleptics cause a recognisible pathology, which they name neuroleptic induced deficit syndrome .
In addition to Parkinson’s, akathsia, blunted emotions and tardive dyskinesia, patients treated with neuroleptics suffer from an ‘increased incidence of blindness, fatal blood clots, arrhythmia, heat stroke, swollen breasts,, leaking breasts, impotence, obesity, sexual dysfunction, blood disorders, skin rashers, seizures and early death’.
1994 Neuroleptics found to cause an increase in the volume of caudate region in the brain.
1994 Harvard investigators report that schizophrenia patients in the US, appear to have worsened over past 20 years, and are now no better than in first decades of 20th century.
1995 ‘Real World’ relapse rates for schizophrenia patients treated with neuroleptics said to be above 80% in the two years following hospital discharge, which is much higher than in the pre neuroleptic era.
1995 Quality of life’ in drug treated patients reported to be ‘very poor’
1998 MRI scans show that neurocelptics cause hypertrophy of caudate, putamen and thalamus,with the increase ‘associated with greater severity of both negative and positive symptoms’.
1998 Neuroleptics use is found to be associated with atrophy of cerebral cortex
1998 Harvard researchers conclude that ‘oxidative stress’ may be the process by which neuroleptics cause neuronal damage to the brain.
1998 Treatment with two or more neuroleptics is found to increase the risk of early death.
2000 Neuroleptics linked to fatal blood clots.
2003 Atypicals linked to an increased risk of obesity, hyperglycemia, diabetes and pancreatitis.
‘The Case against antipsychotic drugs: a 50 eat record of doing more harm than good.’
Despite this history, a cross party government mental health taskforce only this year recommended an increase in the use of neuroleptics, as they consider they have transformed mental care in the last 50 years.
These drugs, have been fed to the autistic, and learning disabled, off label, without monitoring from 5 in schools, and, in institutions for life, causing untold suffering and death.
So what does it feel like, to be Thomas Rawnsley, or any one, of the hundreds of thousands on state enforced polypharmacy?
This is their ‘community living’, their independence, their future, their life, until death.
Their ‘care’, costing the public purse on average £8,000+ per week of NHS money.
Without, the huge pharma bill.
As described by Thomas’ mother Pauline, in her, now removed, Facebook page, written, before Thomas died at 20, after just 2 years, in his MCA state enforced hell .
‘Imagine YOU are trapped in a unit or a home which is locked, you have no choice over when or what you eat, when or if you go out, what you wear, when you go to bed, when you watch TV, what you do minute to minute is dictated by people you have not chosen to ‘look after you’.
Your family are only allowed to visit occasionally.
Staff are present when you have family time.
You spend hours upon hours unmotivated and not stimulated. You are ignored and neglected.
The moment you try and get attention you are considered to be ‘acting out’’.
Consider the sheer willpower Thomas needed to ‘act out’.
Thomas, is receiving ever higher doses of anti psychotics, and, has been, for at least 6 years.
They block his dopamine, making it a Herculean feat just to raise mental, let alone, physical opposition.
His body feels like lead, it takes a huge effort just to walk, or eat, yet, his spirit is strong, and still resists. And his reward ?
A trip to Lifeways/Cambian specialist hospital, their own private ATU, for even more drugging ‘treatment’.
The dopamine block, has removed any remote feelings of comfort, reward, and motivation, he tries to cling to, in his terrifying isolation.
He feels disengaged from events around him, demotivated, restless, anxious, and irritated, but, can hardly move.
He is trapped, in beyond mental anguish inside his own body.
This is how hundreds of thousands feel, today, and every day for the rest of their, some might say, thankfully, short lives.
Now, add on the effect of high dosage anti depressants .
That cause desensitivity to seronin, removing, any possible feelings of happiness, wellbeing, or, hope.
Chronic, impotent, black depression, and aggression, worsening over time.
And the sedative effect of these drugs decease overtime, justifying, ever higher doses, increasing side effects, both physical and mental.
Producing perfect pharma cash cows.
Yet, this study in 2009, shows that the effect of antipsychotics on the learning disabled is little over the placebo.
6% develop movement disorder- painful cramps and ticks, continual involuntary movements of mouth and tongue, often leading to Parkinsons; 10% anti cholinergic effects; 5% sedation; and 5% will develop weight from antipsychotics.
Together with chest infections, bouts of pneumonia and weakening of the heart.
And, these conditions, worsen over time, exacerbated by ever higher drug doses.
The result- a drooling, mouth clicking, tongue and head rolling, pain racked body, spotlessly groomed, strapped into a wheelchair.
But, the most needed drug, will not be administered, by their itinerant, prescribed, tick boxed ‘care’- pain relief.
The system does not factor in,pain.
How could pain be picked up on, or, distinguished from behavioural/mental angst ?
And it is not looked for
As, physical problems- impactions, cystitis, appendicitis, tooth/ head/ear ache, cancer, Parkinson’s, osteoporosis, will not even be picked up, let alone treated.
How could they be ?
Our NHS facilities, can’t cope with normal patients, let alone, non compliant, DOLs/safeguarded ones.
And, they are far too costly, though £8,000 + a week, is spent and mainly profit, on their pharma containment.
Even NHS scans to detect faecal impactions are no longer available at 18.
Is it any wonder, 3 have already died today, and will tomorrow.
Of ‘natural causes’, signed off mainly, by private profit ‘specialist doctors’.
In view of the Mental Health Taskforce’s Recommendations for medicalisation and private, monopoly, max profit residential now, the only support for the autistic and learning disabled, we must consider, the unaccountable, unjustifiable over use of pharmacology and how it contributes to the 3 Learning Disabled a day dying needlessly, including Thomas Rawnsley.
In July last year a letter was sent to NHS England, by the National Clinical Director for Learning Disabilities, and The Chief Pharmacological Officer, supported by The Royal College of Nursing, The Royal College of Psychiatry, and The Royal Pharmacological Society.
It states as follows;
In December 2012, the Department of Health publication
“Transforming Care: A national response to Winterbourne View Hospital”
“7.31 We have heard deep concerns about the over-use of antipsychotic and antidepressant medicines.
Health professionals caring for people with learning disabilities, should assess and keep under review the medicines requirements for each individual ( but who checks that they do and the requirements are in their best interests and what sanctions exist ?) to determine the best course of action for that patient, taking into account the views of the person wherever possible and their family and/or carer(s).
( this is practically impossible, as the autistic/LD have difficulty communicating, and are not listened to, if family are not cut out, frightened they will be, and carers are itinerant and prescribed. And none have any power over clinicians employed by care providers)
Services should have systems, and policies in place, for that patient to ensure that this ( the review or substance of its outcome ?) is done safely, and in a timely manner, and should carry out regular audits of medication prescribing and management, involving pharmacists, doctors and nurses”
(What use is an audit, if all professionals are employed and prescribed by care provider, and no central check on the audit of medication, and their is no independent voice and no sanction if no audit even ?).
When used appropriately, and where there is a clear diagnosis of, for example, psychosis, these medicines can contribute effectively to the treatment of people, including those with learning disability.
(Psychosis, is historically rare, but can and is being caused by antipsychotics , or, worse still diagnosed incorrectly, as with my daughter on repeating oral abuse, construed, as hearing voices. In any event how can LD/autistic communicate psychosis ?)
Medicines, such as anti convulsants are vital to controlling debilitating seizures. However, all these medicines have powerful effects, often with serious side effects.
So when they are used, a careful assessment of the risks and benefits must be undertaken. However, and worse of all, some of these medicines can be used wholly inappropriately, as a “chemical restraint” to control behaviour, in place of other more appropriate treatment options.
Unfortunately there is not much evidence to guide practice in this area.
Despite a very recent and thorough analysis of the evidence by NICE, it would appear that the limited evidence that does exist around adverse effects of antipsychotic treatment in this population reflect the concerns about use in adults with schizophrenia.
(So the LD/autistic are being medicated, with no evidence of risks/benefits to the LD/autistic, no guidance, the only guidance being, for the schizophrenic).
The Maudsley Guideline1 reports on one very large systematic review which quantified risks and benefits of maintenance antipsychotics. The results described
1 Taylor D, Paton C, Kapur S. The Maudsley Prescribing Guidelines in Psychiatry – 12th edition. Wiley Blackwell
Publications Gateway Reference 03689
High quality care for all, now and for future generations below equate to the following for every 100 adult patients treated with an antipsychotic agent for schizophrenia:
– six will develop movement disorder; 10 will develop anti cholinergic effects; 5 will develop sedation; and 5 will develop weight gain.
Close links between the use of antipsychotics, stroke and mortality have been reported in patients with dementia
( For what benefit ? The profit from efficient care ?)
2,3. We do not know the extent to which we can extrapolate the findings of studies into side effects of antipsychotics in people with schizophrenia and people with dementia but they are not without risks and are likely to cause significant harm for some individuals with learning disability.
As a consequence of the deep concerns of inappropriate use of these medicines, NHS England gathered together a group of carers, health professionals, policy makers and others to develop together a programme of work aimed at understanding the scale and appropriateness of the use of antipsychotic, antidepressant, anxiolytic, hypnotic and antiepileptic medicines.
The group commissioned three pieces of work:
1.an examination of prescribing of these medicines in primary care by Public Heath England (PHE);
2. partnership working with six project sites in England to further understand process and pathways to test new ways of working by NHS Improving Quality (NHS IQ);
3.. an audit of Second Opinion Authorised Doctor information on use of medicines in people detained under the Mental Health Act by the Care Quality Commission (CQC).
Examination of primary care prescribing This work has identified a high level of inappropriate use of psychotropic drugs in people with learning disabilities.
The study used GP records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. This is a well-established system that collects comprehensive, anonymised, clinical data from a large number of general practices throughout the UK for research studies.
It covers roughly 8% of the population of England and the data it provides is considered to give a good representation of practice in England.
Among adults known to their GP to have learning disabilities, excluding only those in hospital as inpatients, on any average day, 17.0% were being prescribed antipsychotic drugs, 16.9% antidepressants, 7.1% drugs used in mania and hypomania, 4.2% anxiolytics, and 2.7% hypnotics 2.7%.
Nearly one third (29.5%) of all adults known to have learning disabilities were receiving one or more of these types of drug.
Banerjee S: The use of antipsychotic medication for people with dementia: Time for action. A report for the Minister of State for Care Services: Department of Health; November 2009.
Douglas I: Exposure to antipsychotics and risk of stroke: self-controlled case series study: BMJ 2008;337:a1227
These figures, particularly those for antipsychotics and antidepressants are much higher than the prevalence of psychotic conditions, or affective disorders, established from research studies and increase progressively with age.
58% of adults receiving antipsychotics and 32% of those receiving antidepressants had no relevant diagnosis recorded.
22.5% of prescriptions for antipsychotics included more than one drug in this class and 5.5% were for doses exceeding the recommended maximum.
Based on these figures the authors estimated, that on an average day in England, between 30,000 and 35,000 adults with a learning disability are being prescribed an antipsychotic, an antidepressant or both without appropriate clinical indications (psychosis or affective disorder). This is 16.2% of the adult population known to their GP as having a learning disability.
( That is huge amount of pharma profit, and neurological suppression without any proven benefit or even justification)
Rates of prescribing to adults with autism were also high, though the pattern was less clear as numbers were much smaller. Prescribing of drugs acting on the central nervous system to children and young people with learning disabilities and autism was much less common but also had worrying features.
We recognise that these medicines are typically initiated by specialist doctors and only very rarely by general practitioners.
Whilst the responsibility for prescribing lies with the practitioner who signs the prescription, it is critical that GPs and specialists work together, through shared care arrangements, to monitor and regularly review patients taking these powerful medicines.
(Specialist doctors, are now, almost exclusively employed, by the monopoly residential care providers, who also have their own specialist hospitals. They are employed, under strict codes of conduct, on a commercially aware basis, so have no professional independence. GPs and family are cut out)
A report of the study is published by PHE on the Learning Disabilities Team website (www.ihal.org.uk).
Pilot improvement project
This project examined medicines practices and related matters in six sites across England which provide care for people with learning disabilities.
The staff at each site worked with experts from NHS IQ, carrying out a “deep dive” into their practice.
Whilst many examples of good practice were found, there were also some common themes for improvement. For example, patients, carers or families did not always know why medicines had been prescribed and there was evidence of inadequate communication. On the other hand, there was evidence of the benefits, for example multidisciplinary working, and in particular the deployment of clinical pharmacy expertise. The full report has been published by NHS IQ and can be found at http://www.nhsiq.nhs.uk/winterbourne.
Second Opinion Authorised Doctor information The CQC has access to data on medication prescribed to people with learning disabilities detained under the Mental Health Act (1983) and who require a second opinion for treatment with medication for mental health, under the provisions of that Act.
(As , all LD/autistic, are now being moved from public NHS detention, to local ‘community living’, not under MHA section, but MCA DOLs/ best interests, so a second opinion authorisation will not be required.)
The data arise from the work of Second Opinion Appointed Doctors (SOADs) who provide a statutory safeguard for such patients.
(No such safeguard in private community MCA provision, none MHA).
SOADs visit the patient and explore the current and proposed treatment, certifying what is considered to be appropriate and reasonable in circumstances where the patient cannot or does not consent to it, discussing it with team members and the patient before reaching their conclusions.
The treatment plan is submitted to the CQC when the Second Opinion request is made by the provider clinician. These plans, comprising the types and doses of medication and the reasons given by the doctor for the prescription, together with information provided about the patient’s diagnosis, were compared with information and guidelines in the British National Formulary (BNF).
It must be recognised that the BNF is a guide, and may be departed from if there are sound reasons.
(Who checks ‘sounds reasons’ ? So, no check and no means of enforcement of safeguards ?).
Similarly, many of the medications used in learning disability and considered professionally appropriate may not be specifically licensed for this population and the indications described in the BNF may not cover applicability in this field.
This is because the research is relatively limited, and medication manufacturers do not commonly submit information on Learning Disability usage in their product licence application.
(So, it appears, even when licenced ie for psychosis. Short term severe behaviour, depression, there has been no information on the usage of these drugs on LD/autistic to the licencing authority . This begs the questions, how do they know the drugs benefits, and why are they being used. The learning disabled are being used as guinea pigs).
As a consequence such use may not be cited in the BNF.
As an example, autism is not a BNF-recognised indication for prescribing antidepressants, however it is one for which they are widely used according to the literature though evidence of efficacy is limited.
(So why is such medication used particularly in view of serious side effects, long term, on high doses.?)
In this survey autism appeared to be a distinct reason for antidepressant use.
The survey identified 945 requests representing 796 individual patients across a 10 month period – some 10% of the total Second Opinion requests ( so not under MCA) submitted in that period. 2/3 were male, mean age 34 yrs. 53% were being treated by an NHS provider, 47% by an independent.
Over half of the prescriptions did not overtly match the accepted indications by reference to the diagnosis.
There is published work from specialists in learning disability giving detailed suggestions on medication applicability, however matching these against the data was outside the scope of this survey.
Private hospitals had a higher proportion of patients’ prescriptions featuring multiple simultaneous medications of similar type, and in higher doses, compared with NHS hospitals; it is not yet apparent whether this relates to differences in practice, or arises from commissioners referring different diagnostic and prognostic patient groups to different provider types.
In a significant number of cases medication appeared to be prescribed primarily to manage behaviour that was perceived as challenging rather than for symptoms of mental illness.
While the provider’s treatment rationale provided some clarification for medication use by expanding on the patient’s presentation, in general there was limited rationale offered for the entirety of the treatment plan, particularly when polypharmacy and high dosage was used.
The intervention of the SOAD made changes to the overall treatment plan in some 25% of cases, commonly by restricting the dose total or number of preparations permitted to be used.
The full report will be published by CQC in September.
(This can and only worsen, as all care provision is to be, in private local community living under employed professionals in specialist private hospitals.)
( These do not appear to have happened ? Instead Mental Taskforce recommends more use of anti psychotics and antidepressants )
Thesethree reports provide robust evidence of inappropriate use of powerful medicines in people with learning disabilities. This is not acceptable practice and must improve.
To address this we intend to build on the success of a call to action to reduce antipsychotics in dementia ( black boxed since 2012 anyway) by applying a similar collaborative approach to reducing inappropriate use of these and other powerful medicines in people with Learning Disability.
This process begins on 17 July 2015. We have called an urgent action summit to bring together carers and family representatives, professionals, improvement experts and other key interested parties to agree the steps that need to be taken to reduce the inappropriate use of these medicines and improve this aspect of care in people with learning disabilities who are some of the most vulnerable people in our society. We will issue regular updates on this work and call upon your support in addressing this serious issue.
(These are guidelines only ,and can, and are, being ignored, and, with care, now in a maximum profit industry, there is no regulation, control, enforcement or, even check, on the use of medication amounts and dosages on the autistic and LD.)
We have published guidance for those patients and their families and/or carers who may be worried about the medicines they or their loved one is receiving which can be found here.
(But parents, nor the autistic/LD, have any say in their enforced MCA medication for life.).
Dr Dominic Slowie, Dr Keith Ridge CBE National Clinical Director for Learning Disability Chief Pharmaceutical Officer
Five months before this letter was sent Thomas Rawnsley died and many more in St Andrews, Northampton.
The medication of depression, is justified by the belief, in an unproven theory, that depression, is caused by seronergic neurons, releasing too little serotonin into the synaptic gap, making the serotonegic pathways underactive.
Antidepressants, purport to bring serotonin levels up to ‘normal’
Despite this over 57 million antidepressant prescriptions were issued in England in 2013- a rise of over 500% since 1992.
11% of all women and 6% of men in England take them.
Yet trials show little effect over a placebo.
So what will increasing serotonin via antidepressants, do to their brains ?
And, as serotonin acts, in, as yet unknown ways, on different parts of our infinitely complex brain, on a person’s bodily functions ?
In the same way, as anti psychotics, change the pathology of the brain, and make it super sensitive to dompamine, causing psychosis, anti depressants increase serotonin, triggering pathological changes to the serotonergic system, which actually causes and/or worsens depression.
Prior to being medicated, a ‘depressed’ person, has no known chemical imbalance, anti depressants, then increase the level of serotonin in the brain, by stopping its normal removal from the synapses.
This triggers a cascade of changes, and several weeks later, which is why, it take weeks, for the medication to kick in, the serotonergic pathway is operating in a very abnormal way.
To compensate for the fact, the serotonin reuptake channels are blocked ,the presynaptic neuron produces more serotonin
After a few weeks, the saturation of increased serotonin exacerbated by blocked removal from the synapses, causes the postsynaptic neurons to become desensitised to serotonin.
And, then this drug induced neuropathology, appears to cause depression, as clinical trials have shown antidepressants, worsen, depressive epitodes
And this is also borne out, by the depression epidemic in the USA, the escalation of which, co insides with the increased use of antidepressants. .
In 1955, 38,200 were in mental hospitals due to depression, today, a major depressive disorder, is the leading cause of disability in the USA , affecting 15 million adults, and in 2008, the John Hopkins School of Public Health reported, that 58% of this group were ‘severely impaired’.
In addition to causing depression, anti depressants cause a multitude of side effects, including aggression, agitation, suicidal thoughts, sexual dysfunction, suppression of REM sleep, muscle tics, fatigue, emotional blunting- no highs or lows- apathy, memory impairment, problem solving difficulties, loss of creativity, and learning difficulties.
So all this physical and mental damage is caused for what benefit ?
None, that by NICE standards is ‘clinically significant’.
Pre Prozac, the NIMH reviewed the old antidepressants- monamine oxidase inhibitors MAOIs and tricyclics, and found, the ‘more stringently controlled the study, the lower the improvement rate reported for a drug’.
In well controlled studies, 61% of drug related patients improved versus 46% of placebo patients.
This minimal efficacy, led researchers to wonder, if the placebo response, rather than the drug, accounted for small improvement.
They conducted seven studies comparing a tricyclic, to an ‘active’ placebo, ie one with a side effect, and in six out of the seven there was no difference in outcomes.
But Prozac PR had been building up big time, read how Eli Lilly,’s Dr John Virapen, secured this blockbuster drug, and then turned whistle blower, and wrote the best seller ‘Side effect death: corruption in the pharmaceutical industry”.
In 2008 Irving Kirsch at University of Hull, found that in trials of Prozac, Effexor, Serzone, and Paxil, symptoms in those medicated, dropped 9.6 points on the Hamilton Rating Scale of Depression, versus 7.8 points for the placebo group.
NICE states a 3 point difference, is needed to demonstrate, a ‘clinically significant benefit’, this was 1.8.
In 2009 The British Journal of Psychiatry stated there was ‘limited valid evidence’ for the use of the drugs.
A group of European psychiatrists affiliated with the World Health Organisation conducted a review of Paxil’s clinical data, and concluded that ‘among adults with moderate to severe major depression’, this popular SSRI, was not superior to placebo in terms of overall treatment effectiveness and acceptability.