Fuck Doctors

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Postby tal » Tue Jun 16, 2009 2:29 pm

US Gov. Mental Screens / Preemptive Interventions = Eugenics All Over Again
Sunday, 14 June 2009

The NAS report is one of several U.S. government initiatives aimed at lending legitimacy to, and vastly expanding, the use of the most toxic drugs in pharmacopeia in children.

This is a follow-up to yesterday's Infomail about a report under the auspices of the National Academies of Science (NAS) which calls for pre-emptive interventions to “prevent” “mental, emotional and behavioral disorders among young people.” The NAS report recommends “rigorous” mental screening, followed by pharmacologic "treatment" intervention with highly toxic psychoactive drugs—antidepressants and antipsychotics—even as the authors acknowledge that: "Early-detection programs will identify as candidates for mental illness some people who are merely persnickety or shy or eccentric."

The NAS report is one of several U.S. government initiatives aimed at lending legitimacy to, and vastly expanding, the use of the most toxic drugs in pharmacopoeia in children. Most of these children would never be considered candidates for psychiatric diagnosis or treatment in other countries. The implementation of these initiatives will ensnare millions of American children into becoming involuntary consumers of drugs that induce metabolic, hormonal, neurological, cardiovascular damage.

Of note, before the NAS report had even been edited for publication, the Department of Health & Human Services (DHHS) has already established an "Early Detection & Intervention for the Prevention of Psychosis Program" (EDIPPP) to implement the report’s recommendations. The problem: there exists not a shred of scientific evidence to support "preventive" cures for psychosis.

The NAS report is replete with expressions such as “bio-markers” for mental disorders, when not a single genetic, chemical, physiological, radiological or any other biological marker has been identified to aid in diagnosis or predicting treatment response of any psychiatric condition in the DSM, psychiatry’s diagnostic manual. As acknowledged in the DSM :
"The DSM-IV criteria remain a consensus without clear empirical data...the behavioral characteristics specified in DSM-IV…remain subjective...” p. 1163

Yet, in the NAS report DSM diagnoses themselves are absurdly treated as rock-solid descriptions of natural disease phenomena. Not a single of these mental disorder diagnoses’ many contradictions are discussed, let alone assessed critically. The NAS report is not a critical assessment of the evidence by a well-funded panel of prestigious scientists: it resembles a cursory literature review as if written by a naïve undergraduate student.

According to the DHHS “Talking Points” document, "EDIPPP was launched and funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation which has invested $16.9 million in this promising program." EDIPPP program sites are in Albuquerque, NM; Davis, CA; Glen Oaks, NY; Portland, ME; Salem, OR; and Ypsilanti, MI.

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is an arm of Johnson & Johnson, the parent company of Janssen, makers of the antipsychotic drug Risperdal (risperidone). Janssen is being sued by the Texas Attorney General for bilking the state Medicaid / Medicare budget, and for having "improperly influenced the development" of the Texas Medication Algorithm prescribing protocols (TMAP).

The TMAP marketing scheme was initiated by Johnson & Johnson in 1995 with an investment of $224,000. Psychotropic drug prescribing guidelines were formulated by industry-paid “consensus panels” whose opinions were used to override the scientific evidence about these drugs’ insignificant clinical advantage but severe additional risks. TMAP guidelines were uncritically adopted by state mental health agencies, ensuring that taxpayers would pay exorbitantly for the latest patented drugs.

TMAP precipitated huge overprescribing of psychoactive drugs, especially among the most vulnerable populations. By 2004, Johnson and Johnson reaped $ 272 million in Risperdal sales in Texas alone.

Even more sinister than the bilking of U.S. taxpayers, however, are the signs that EDIPPP resuscitates America's shameful eugenic policies of the first half of the 20th century.

Eugenicists of yesteryear screened families and school children to root out "mental defectives" by means of dubious questionnaires screens to "catch them before they fall." Former eugenicists forced surgical sterilizations on those deemed "mentally defective" based on bogus questionnaires. Emergent American eugenicists promote pharmacological fixes that have the potential for chemically castrating those deemed "mentally ill."

Even as the EDIPPP tacitly acknowledges the absence of "effective diagnostic tools and interventions" which it "seeks to develop," it promotes controversial pharmacologic interventions on the basis of still-dubious screens and “tests,” stating that its “purpose is to avoid making a mental illness diagnosis.” Mental health discourse is defined by circular reasoning.

Below is the short version ("Crib Sheet") of an 18 page internal document distributed to DHHS employees on June 10, 2009. The EDIPPP "talking points" are for public relations purposes. The main justification for the program is stated as follows: "The intervention treats symptoms of mental illness in young people before serious illness occurs."

The clinical benefit of the drugs to be used—primarily SSRI antidepressants and the second generation antipsychotics—remain unproven, especially when they are compared to real-world alternatives under real-world conditions. However, the list of their documented hazards grows. For example, Though little discussed, most people prescribed antidepressants or antipsychotics experience sexual dysfunction which may continue indefinitely, even long after the drugs are stopped. Among those prescribed SSRI antidepressants, sexual dysfunction occurs in over 60%. (See: Wikipedia.)

Antipsychotics are a major cause of sexual dysfunction (such as decreased libido, impotence and erectile dysfunction, impaired orgasm, abnormal ejaculation, priapism, enlarged breasts in boys). These effects occur as a result of dopamine, histamine, and cholinergic receptor antagonism, which result in sedation, impaired motivation and reward, hyperprolactinemia, and reduced peripheral vasodilation (causing a decrease in blood flow). A review in Human Psychopharmacology (2008) found the following:

“The rate of sexual dysfunction among men and women receiving haloperidol [an older antipsychotic] for 12 months is more than 70%” (p. 206).

“Risperidone [Risperdal] treatment is associated with sexual dysfunction in the majority of patients who receive it... Evidence from large-scale, naturalistic studies shows that 60–70% of patients receiving risperidone in the clinical setting experience sexual dysfunction, similar to rates seen with haloperidol” (p. 203).

“Sexual dysfunction, including decreased libido and impotence, occurs in more than 50% of patients receiving olanzapine [Zyprexa]” (p. 206).

“Sexual dysfunction rates with quetiapine [Seroquel] are 50-60%” (p. 206).

“... there is, as yet, no published description of the overall prevalence of sexual dysfunction among ziprasidone [Abilify] -treated patients in clinical practice” (p. 206).

A 2006 post-marketing surveillance review of the FDA MedWatch database revealed that Risperdal, in particular, elevates prolactin levels to dangerous levels, causing pituitary tumors and gynecomastia (breast development in boys).

"Risperidone had the highest adjusted reporting ratios for hyperprolactinemia (34.9%), galactorrhea (19.9%), and pituitary tumor (18.7%) among the seven antipsychotics, and one of the highest scores for all drugs in the AERS database.” “Some tumors were associated with visual field defects, hemorrhage, convulsions, surgery, and severe (>10-fold) prolactin elevations."

Since 2006, the Risperdal drug label acknowledges the risk of gynecomastia in children:
"In clinical trials in 1885 children / adolescents, gynecomastia was reported in 2.3% [43] of risperidone-treated patients." Given that adolescents are still developing sexually, exposure to drugs that increase prolactin levels, and interfere with, or arrest normal sexual development, may potentially result in chemical castration. Where are the long-term studies?

The FDA’s rush to approve expanded licensure to market antipsychotics for children should be viewed in the context of this morally reprehensible, medically unsupportable policy by the federal government.
Risperdal and Abilify were given expanded FDA licensure without even a public hearing. Last week, an advisory committee considering expanding indications of AstraZeneca’s Seroquel, Pfizer’s Geodon, and Eli Lilly’s Zyprexa to children and adolescents avoided acknowledging the elephants in the room—as Martha Rosenberg aptly describes in her insightful report about the two-day proceedings (below).

When a panel member tried to delve into any number of embarrassing safety issues—as for example, 5 child suicides in a Seroquel trial, or Geodon-related “sudden deaths,” the panel member was swiftly led away by FDA’s own chief of psychiatric drug products, Dr. Thomas Laughren. Laughren “didn’t want to be derailed over the two children who perversely died from stroke and cardiopulmonary failure in Geodon,” when he stated that there’s “hazard in drawing too much from subsetting the data.” For his success in diverting attention from children’s drug-related deaths, Dr. Laughren was thanked by Pfizer’s representative at the hearing.

The FDA advisory panel was not provided with any of the damaging evidence about antipsychotics’ harmful effects contained in manufacturers’ internal documents that have been uncovered during litigation. Nor were they provided with imaging evidence of brain damage caused by these drugs, nor data about their serious adverse effects on normal sexual function. The manufacturers’ determination to gain legitimacy for off-label marketing was accomplished with no one voting against pediatric approval of the three drugs despite the lethal risks for children. A handful of panelists abstained.

FDA approval of antipsychotics for pediatric use removes an obstacle that undermined the legitimacy of prescribing unapproved drugs for children under the government’s auspices.

EDIPPP is a prescription for disaster, with or without FDA’s seal of approval.
As was revealed at the advisory committee hearing, screening or diagnosing pediatric bipolar or schizophrenia is mostly wrong: of 3,000 suspected childhood schizophrenia cases recruited for a study, only 110 proved to be valid.
The implementation of EDIPPP will result in unknown numbers of children being condemned to exposure to toxic drugs, and unknown numbers to drug-induced disability, on the basis of junk science and delusional prevention theories that are grounded in eugenics—not scientific evidence.


Who will lead the way, step forward, and urge President Obama to ”Stop this travesty—it’s happening on your watch!

Who within the medical scientific community will raise their voice and use their influence to stop this travesty before it's too late?

References:
1. Baggaley M. Sexual dysfunction in schizophrenia: Focus on recent evidence. Human Psychopharmacology 2008; 23(3): 201-209.

2. Szarfman A, Tonning JM, Levine JG, Doraiswamy PM. Atypical antipsychotics and pituitary tumors: a pharmacovigilance study. Pharmacotherapy 2006; 26(6):748-58.


Posted by Vera Hassner Sharav

link

-
tal
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 11:20 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby lightningBugout » Tue Jun 16, 2009 5:51 pm

Penguin wrote:You got that right. Sorry, that point kind of eluded me - but its a myopia for us all too... Think of animal tests, used widely in medical research...Think about what kind of stress the test animals are under, and if their life is anything resembling their natural life, and what kind of stress they are under as they are used as research subjects....

Much of our medical research data from animal tests may not reflect reality, except of that of fearful stressed out animals. It will skew any and all results gained thereof, however.

http://books.google.com/books?id=LmKCN-7kluYC

The biology of animal stress By Gary P. Moberg, Joy A. Mench

The subjects of stress and animal welfare are currently attracting immense interest. The purpose of this book is to bring together a range of perspectives from biomedical research (including human health and animal models of human stress) on stress and welfare, and to assess new approaches to conceptualising and alleviating stress. Contributors include leading authorities from North America, Europe and Australia.


Right on - I am so glad you brought this up. It reminds me of this woman I have read about who is autistic and able to communicate deeply with animals. As a result she was hired by the meat industry to design more empathetic ergonomics, because the stress chemicals released by mortally fearful animals apparently taste shitty.

There really will almost have to come a time when science forces us in much greater numbers to acknowledge that eating animals is fucking brutal.
"What's robbing a bank compared with founding a bank?" Bertolt Brecht
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby professorpan » Tue Jun 16, 2009 10:04 pm

lbo -- you're talking about Temple Grandin. Very interesting woman.

And speaking of the National Academy of Sciences, they recently released a groundbreaking report calling for what is, essentially, the end of animal testing. Though it's not likely to happen soon, the NAS report calls for more reliance on in vitro and in silico (computer modeling) methods to determine toxicity or lack thereof and a shift away from using animal models.
User avatar
professorpan
 
Posts: 3592
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 12:17 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby lightningBugout » Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:16 am

professorpan wrote:lbo -- you're talking about Temple Grandin. Very interesting woman.


thanks pan. yeah i heard a radio show, probably Ira Glass, that interviewed her -- she had really interesting vibes. now I can look her up.

And speaking of the National Academy of Sciences, they recently released a groundbreaking report calling for what is, essentially, the end of animal testing. Though it's not likely to happen soon, the NAS report calls for more reliance on in vitro and in silico (computer modeling) methods to determine toxicity or lack thereof and a shift away from using animal models.


And thank you for this too -- there are so many different trends in health, all moving very quickly, many of them conflicting. Pseudo-Eugenics, sure, but much more progressive movements happening simultaneously.
"What's robbing a bank compared with founding a bank?" Bertolt Brecht
User avatar
lightningBugout
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:34 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby teamdaemon » Thu Jun 18, 2009 6:40 pm

Hi all. I just wanted to comment on this thread since this is my pet topic. I think that a more appropriate title would be "Fuck Robot Doctors". Robot Doctors compulsively prescribe drugs because that's what they are programmed to do. Here are some links to some good doctors:

http://www.treeoflife.nu/

http://wholeapproach.com/

These two links go to sites with information on treating diabetes and yeast infections holistically. These are two problems that are caused by out pathological Food and Drug policies. Psychiatric drugs cause diabetes and antibiotics cause yeast infections. Yeast infections are an especially relevant cause for concern considering the latest wave of government engineered disease that must be treated with them.

Hope this was helpful.

peace~
teamdaemon
 
Posts: 557
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:33 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Fuck Doctors

Postby §ê¢rꆧ » Wed Jan 18, 2012 9:11 am

Bumping this thread by request from the disappeared OP :) :hourglass:

I've always been something of a self-medicator. I don't self-medicate blindly, and always do as much research on what I'm taking as possible, whether it's a street drug, a nutritional supplement, a shamanic sacrament or off-brand prescription drug shipped from a rogue international pharmacy. I haven't had much opportunity to avail myself of doctorly wisdom though, mostly for financial reasons - but also because of instilled sense of fear and distrust for the white coats in general.

Still, doctors have helped me out of more than a few jams, and I'm looking forward to Fall 2012 when I go back to school and can get some "free" medical insurance, advice, and maybe even some prescriptions :evilgrin001: I've got a serious circadian rhythm disorder and all the problems that come with that, a chronic acute lower back pain that really slows me down, and a family history of the usual killjoy diseases - some cancer, diabetes, heart disease... oh and I've really come around to identifying with bipolar disorder, but I don't think I'll ever unlock /that/ door to my mind for a stranger to walk through- for that, I'm grateful for having a few good understanding friends and loved ones.

Anywise... I realize the limits of my own understanding and natural biases, and feel I am long-past the need for some medical support. I'm looking for any suggestions for researching doctors online, once I figure out who/what is available to me in the insurance network I'll belong to once I go back to school. Also in general strategies for dealing with doctors, and the best kind of data to present them with (for example I plan on getting back to keeping a sleeplog to document my sleep problems).

If I have to fuck (with) doctors, I guess I had better learn the mating rituals... any suggestions welcome.
User avatar
§ê¢rꆧ
 
Posts: 1197
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:12 pm
Location: Region X
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Fuck Doctors

Postby slomo » Wed Jan 18, 2012 12:53 pm

Should Participation in Vaccine Clinical Trials be Mandated?

In recent decades there has been a distressing decline in the numbers of healthy volunteers who participate in clinical trials [7], a decline that has the potential to become a key rate-limiting factor in vaccine development. Reasons for this decline are unclear but are likely to be multifaceted. One familiar problem is the payment of volunteers [8]. To date, the relatively meagre compensation that participants often receive could be seen to belittle and undervalue the contribution of these individuals to global health. The modest financial remuneration commonly provided often means that students and the unemployed make up the bulk of volunteers [6, 8, 9]. As a result, the risks of developing a health intervention that would benefit the whole population are carried disproportionately by some of society’s most poor and vulnerable. This is a situation few would judge to be fair or ethical. However it is hard to increase volunteer payment without creating financial incentives. “Danger money” is frowned upon as an inducement that inevitably clouds an individual’s appreciation of risk, limiting the likelihood that consent is informed [6, 7]. As a result, consensus has generally dictated that payment for volunteers’ trial involvement be modest and limited to compensation for travel, time, and inconvenience only.

If progression of promising vaccines from the lab to the clinic is to remain unaffected and financial inducement is an ethically unacceptable solution to the recruitment shortage, other strategies need to be considered. Compulsory involvement in vaccine studies is one alternative solution that is not as outlandish as it might seem on first consideration. Many societies already mandate that citizens undertake activities for the good of society; in several European countries registration for organ-donation has switched from “opt-in” (the current U.S. system) to “opt-out” systems (in which those who do not specifically register as nondonors are presumed to consent to donation) [10], and most societies expect citizens to undertake jury service when called upon. In these examples, the risks or inconvenience to an individual are usually limited and minor. Mandatory involvement in vaccine trials is therefore perhaps more akin to military conscription, a policy operating today in 66 countries. In both conscription and obligatory trial participation, individuals have little or no choice regarding involvement and face inherent risks over which they have no control, all for the greater good of society.


So let's see: it's ethically wrong (and "coercive" according to my required regular human subjects training to satisfy my IRB) to pay people to participate in studies, but it's no ethical problem at all to mandate involvement in potentially harmful and invasive activities?

As if it wasn't clear already, this society is evil and insane beyond belief.
User avatar
slomo
 
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:42 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Fuck Doctors

Postby eyeno » Wed Jan 18, 2012 4:12 pm

The stage is being set now for mandatory flu vaccines for the entire population. I don't know if the exemptions for religion and medical reasons will prevail. The last few flu seasons have been interesting with all the new designer flu strains (be they all real or imaginary) and the creative methods used to verify and tabulate exposure would be laughable if not so sad. I am waiting to see what charades are played out this flu season.
User avatar
eyeno
 
Posts: 1878
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 5:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Fuck Doctors

Postby slomo » Thu Jan 19, 2012 12:45 am

I should add that a more careful reading of the opinion piece I posted above reveals that the author concedes that maybe absolutely compulsory participation might be a tad too coercive, so at the end she proposes a concession, allowing for an explicit opt-out. You know, conscientious objector status. That's might nice of her.
User avatar
slomo
 
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:42 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Fuck Doctors

Postby Hammer of Los » Thu Jan 19, 2012 11:20 am

...

I had a psychological/mystical experience. The ecstasy overtook me. It wasn't my fault, and yet it was.

I sang and danced just a wee bit.

They diagnosed me hypomanic.

Now they are in the process of forcing me to take anti psychotic medication (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olanzapine).

It's a travesty.

I hope and pray it will all work out in the end, for the best for all.

But I do feel like I am being forced to swallow my last vestige of pride. I have always opposed forced medication on the unwilling, on philosophical and religous and political grounds. My wife knows and understands this, yet she is supporting the doctors and is insisting that I take the medication.

Free Will is Para Mount.

Olanzapine. If all it does is help me gain weight, that wouldn't be too bad.

My entire family are advising me to take it.

I can't fight my loved ones.

I will likely have to take the medication.

So long pride. Nice knowing you;







:shrug: :tear :shrug:

...
Hammer of Los
 
Posts: 3309
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 4:48 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Fuck Doctors

Postby §ê¢rꆧ » Thu Jan 19, 2012 3:40 pm

Wow, HoL, that's a tough one... if your loved ones and family members are supporting the idea, maybe you should try it; they may be perceiving a problem that you can't of course. But keep a good journal of your experiences and document its effects, so that if you find you don't like it you can show them and say, see I tried it, and it was not good for me - read this.

I'm not familiar with that med... have you ever been to the Crazy Meds site? It seems like a good place for information about experiences and support for users of such meds: http://crazymeds.us/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HomePage
User avatar
§ê¢rꆧ
 
Posts: 1197
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:12 pm
Location: Region X
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Fuck Doctors

Postby Hammer of Los » Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:12 pm

...

On the other hand...

All praise the buddhist doctor who appeared on my path!

He rubbed out the evil Olanzapine, and replaced it with the subtle natural effect of Valerian.

I agreed to take it in small doses for a small time, to see if I like the effects.

With luck I shall soon be discharged.

So.

Doctor's aren't all bad!

This buddhist fellow may have even stood a chance of understanding a small fraction of the subtlety of what I was trying to tell him!

He was even familiar with the works of Swami Vivekananda and J Krishnamurti!

Blessed be the names of the sages!

When the going gets tough.. well lets just say you should see my flying wizard fingers.



:lovehearts: :angelwings: :lovehearts:

...
Hammer of Los
 
Posts: 3309
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 4:48 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Fuck Doctors

Postby compared2what? » Sat Jan 21, 2012 1:29 am

Hammer of Los wrote:...

I had a psychological/mystical experience. The ecstasy overtook me. It wasn't my fault, and yet it was.


Sweetheart, you are not at fault for being yourself. So please don't think about it in those terms, unless it somehow profits you to do so.

I sang and danced just a wee bit.

They diagnosed me hypomanic.

Now they are in the process of forcing me to take anti psychotic medication (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olanzapine).

It's a travesty.


I am not a doctor. But fwiw, you might want to ask one why he/she favors Olanzapine (or some other atypical neuroleptic) over all the other medications with which hypomania is also quite commonly treated -- eg, Depakote, Lamictal, Tegratol, Neurontin, and whatever other anticonvulsants w/mood-stabilizing properties are out there, if any; or Lithium.

They probably all sometimes have undesirable side-effects for some people. But it's my understanding -- did I mention that I wasn't a doctor? I'm not! -- that even then, they're usually fairly minor considerations for most. And unless you're in some rule-out category, I'm pretty sure none of them is very likely to pose any kind of risk to general health, properly speaking.

I mean, Olanzapine might well be the best option for you. There's not even necessarily a hugely consequential risk of weight gain associated with it, depending on dosage and other factors. Basically, though, it can't hurt to find out whether there are other meds that offer more or less the same therapeutic benefits as Olanzapine. Because if there are, one of them just might turn out to have the kind of side-effect profile you can relate to!

Seriously. It's not like individual taste and temperament just can't ever have any bearing on these questions at all. Or it shouldn't be, at least. Some people would rather be sleepy than fat. Some people would rather be forgetful than sleepy. Some people might be alarmed by the idea that they were taking a drug that might maybe have a tiny chance of putting children of Portuguese heritage under the age of five at increased risk for some kind of bizarre, fatal and irreversible disease that makes all your skin fall off. And some people might just be entertained by it.

It's really a lifestyle-and-identity type of issue, to some extent. That's just how it goes.

So don't despair. Okay? There really might not be any call for it. I wish you the best of health.

But I do feel like I am being forced to swallow my last vestige of pride. I have always opposed forced medication on the unwilling, on philosophical and religous and political grounds. My wife knows and understands this, yet she is supporting the doctors and is insisting that I take the medication.


I don't need to tell you to listen to her over me, right?

:lovehearts:
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Fuck Doctors

Postby compared2what? » Sat Jan 21, 2012 1:34 am

Hammer of Los wrote:...

On the other hand...

All praise the buddhist doctor who appeared on my path!

He rubbed out the evil Olanzapine, and replaced it with the subtle natural effect of Valerian.

I agreed to take it in small doses for a small time, to see if I like the effects.

With luck I shall soon be discharged.

So.

Doctor's aren't all bad!

This buddhist fellow may have even stood a chance of understanding a small fraction of the subtlety of what I was trying to tell him!

He was even familiar with the works of Swami Vivekananda and J Krishnamurti!

Blessed be the names of the sages!

When the going gets tough.. well lets just say you should see my flying wizard fingers.



:lovehearts: :angelwings: :lovehearts:

...


Oops.

I posted from behind the curve.

But I'm very happy to learn of it, withal.
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Fuck Doctors

Postby eyeno » Sat Jan 21, 2012 1:59 am

Hey hammer of los. Best wishes to you brother. I don't know if you have looked this up but if you haven't I am delivering it to your plate for your consumption.

Bottom line in a nutshell is that you might expect metabolic disturbance from Olanzapine. Metabolic disturbance denotes toxicity happening in the body.

I like your valerian idea, A LOT.

Not giving medical advice but this is the possible consequences of Olanzapine, and not sure I like the way it reads. I hope the valerian works for you bro.


As with all neuroleptic drugs, olanzapine can cause the (sometimes) irreversible movement disorder tardive dyskinesia, and the rare, but life-threatening, neuroleptic malignant syndrome. Some also associate all antipsychotics with permanent brain damage.[20]

Other recognised side effects may include:

akathisia; inability to remain still (restlessness)[21]
dry mouth
dizziness
irritability
sedation
insomnia
constipation
urinary retention
orthostatic hypotension
weight gain
increased appetite
runny nose
impaired judgment, thinking, and motor skills
impaired spatial orientation
impaired responses to senses
seizures
trouble swallowing
dental problems and discoloration of teeth
missed periods
problems with keeping body temperature regulated
apathy, lack of emotion
Endocrine side effects have included hyperprolactinemia, hyperglycemia, and diabetes mellitus
Brain Zaps
Auditory Hallucinations[22]

[edit] Metabolic effects

The Food and Drug Administration requires all atypical antipsychotics to include a warning about the risk of developing hyperglycemia and diabetes, both of which are factors in the metabolic syndrome. These effects may be related to the drugs' ability to induce weight gain, although there are some reports of metabolic changes in the absence of weight gain.[citation needed] Studies have indicated that Olanzapine carries a greater risk of causing and exacerbating diabetes than another commonly prescribed atypical antipsychotic, Risperidone. Of all the atypical antipsychotics, olanzapine is one of the most likely to induce weight gain based on various measures.[23][24][25][26] The effect is not dose dependent.[dubious – discuss] Olanzapine may directly affect adipocyte function, promoting fat deposition.[27] There are some case reports of olanzapine-induced diabetic ketoacidosis.[28] Olanzapine may decrease insulin sensitivity.[29] though one 3-week study seems to refute this.[30] It may also increase triglyceride levels.[24]

Recent studies have established :

that Olanzapine and Clozapine disturb the metabolism by making the body take preferentially its energy from fat (instead of privileging carbohydrates). Thus, levels of carbohydrates remaining high, the body would develop insulin resistance (reduction of insulin sensitivity).[31]
that Olanzapine promotes fat accumulation : due to disturbances in fat metabolism, rodents become fatter (but don't have their weight increasing at first). Being fatter, they do less exercise, burning less fat and gaining weight.[32]

Despite weight gain, a large multi-center randomized National Institute of Mental Health study found that olanzapine was better at controlling symptoms because patients were more likely to remain on olanzapine than the other drugs.[33] One small, open-label, non-randomized study suggest that taking olanzapine by orally dissolving tablets may induce less weight gain,[34] but this has not been substantiated in a blinded experimental setting.
[edit] Animal toxicology

In a placebo-compared study of six Macaque monkeys receiving olanzapine between 17 and 27 months, a significant brain volume and weight decreases (8-11%) were detected.[35] In latter studies of the stored samples, the changes were attributed to astrocyte and oligodendrocyte loss,[36] with the neurons spared but positioned more closely compared to the controls.[clarification needed] However according to this study the neurons do not seem to be completely spared. The gray matter shrinking found was 14.6%, but the neuron density increase was only 10.2% which corresponds to approximately a loss of 5% of the neurons.[citation needed]

Olanzapine has demonstrated carcinogenic effects in multiple studies when exposed chronically to female mice and rats, but not male mice and rats. The tumors found were in either the liver or mammary glands of the animals.[37]
[edit] Discontinuation

The British National Formulary recommends a gradual withdrawal when discontinuing anti-psychotic treatment to avoid acute withdrawal syndrome or rapid relapse.[38] Due to compensatory changes at dopamine, serotonin, adrenergic and histamine receptor sites in the central nervous system, withdrawal symptoms can occur during abrupt or over-rapid reduction in dosage. Withdrawal symptoms reported to occur after discontinuation of antipsychotics include nausea, emesis, lightheadedness, diaphoresis, dyskinesia, orthostasis, tachycardia, nervousness, dizziness, headache, excessive non-stop crying, and anxiety. The present evidence suggests that these symptoms affect a small number of susceptible individuals treated with antipsychotics.[39][40] Complicated and long-lasting rebound insomnia symptoms can occur after withdrawing from antipsychotics.[citation needed]
[edit] Overdose

Symptoms of an overdose include tachycardia, agitation, dysarthria, decreased consciousness and coma. Death has been reported after an acute overdose of 450 mg, but also survival after an acute overdose of 1500 mg.[41] There is no known specific antidote for olanzapine overdose, and even physicians are recommended to call a certified poison control center for information on the treatment of such a case.[41] Prescription should be kept in small quantity to reduce risk overdose as acute bipolar disorder and schizophrenic patients can be at a high risk of suicide (Eli Lilly 2010
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... Olanzapine
User avatar
eyeno
 
Posts: 1878
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 5:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 157 guests