Everyone who reads RxISK posts will know that SSRI and related drugs (some antibiotics, painkillers, antihistamines and most antidepressants) can cause sexual dysfunction. This has been known since 1961.
And that they can cause suicide. This has been known since 1959.
And that they can cause birth defects. The first publication by an Australian obstetrician, William McBride, on this dates from the mid-1960s, very soon after his reports about the tranquilliser thalidomide.
The defining moment for SSRIs and birth defects was in 2009 when GlaxoSmithKline’s paroxetine was found guilty by a Philadelphia jury of causing Liam Kilker’s birth defects – a verdict that cost GSK over $1 billion but you’d never know it. GSK’s news management swung into operation and almost no-one heard about this outcome with medical readers of the BMJ and other major journals to this day treated with articles about the importance of treating depression in pregnancy with antidepressants.
If someone has a bit of time, it would be interesting to chase the CDC site trumpeting World Birth Defect Day and see what they have to say about the role of drugs in general and antidepressants in particular in causing birth defects.
Both macrolide, fluoroquinolone and certain tetracycline antibiotics have been linked to birth defects but will CDC mention this?
Deja Connu
One of the best know pieces of information in the Western world may be that thalidomide causes birth defects. This drug brought us two shocks. One was the shocking nature of the defects – armless, legless babies. The other was the shock that a drug could cause birth defects – the idea that environmental factors could cause birth defects was not then in our DNA.
The extent to which the problems thalidomide causes became known outside the “West” has been less clear. In South America Chemie-Gruenenthal, the marketers of thalidomide, made it widely available until relatively recently – endorsed by WHO, with the company boss being made some kind of Knight of the Catholic Church. There were likely far more children born with thalidomide caused birth defects in Brazil than ever there were in any European country.
What is less well known in the West or anywhere else is that thalidomide caused sexual dysfunction and agitation up to and including suicidality.
Almost identical to an SSRI in its profile of effects. This is not surprising in that like most antidepressants thalidomide began life as an antihistamine and was loaded from the start therefore with boundary issues – birth defects, agitation and sexual dysfunction.
Ditto isotretinoin and finasteride. Chances are most, perhaps all, drugs causing birth defects also cause sexual changes and akathisia – such as mirtazepine, ondansetron and others.
Thalidomide got on the US market in the early 1990s, 30 years after the birth defect crisis. Its US step-parent, Celgene, quickly brought a derivative Lenalidomide (Revlimid) on the market as a treatment for multiple myeloma (while pushing the off-label envelope to get it used for cancers in general).
The frisson of a link to thalidomide – thalidomide-chic – and an eye-watering price made Celgene a stock-market darling.
Lenalidomide also causes birth defects, sexual dysfunction and agitation up to and including suicidality (SSRI-like) as does a more recent derivative Otezla which is marketed for skin conditions.
Amnesia
For decades after the thalidomide crisis broke in 1961, women steered clear of drugs during pregnancy.
GSK and other pharmaceutical companies took their time but by the 1990s they were well on their way to getting pregnant women back consuming drugs (and vaccines). Not just consuming but being among the greatest consumers of all – women of child-bearing years have been the core SSRI market.
It is a given today for pregnant women to avoid alcohol and also eating soft cheeses, or cold meats, and avoiding hot showers and all sort of other things like tea or coffee – all of which pregnant women now do – but on no account they are told should they stop taking their pills. Think of the horrific damage you will do to your unborn child if you are remotely depressed or anxious – do the right thing and take your pills.
Birth Defects and
If a drug causes gross birth defects like a missing limb or a heart problem or spina bifida, it is almost for certain that it will cause behavioural problems also.
The children of mothers taking antidepressants – the only group of drugs for which we have large enough datasets to offer a reasonably confident view – appear to have greater rates of autistic spectrum disorders (learning disabilities), hyperactivity or other conduct disorders (likely to be labelled as ADHD), anxiety disorders and “depression” appearing in their children in their teenage years.
They may also be more likely to be asexual.
And to have fetal alcohol syndrome. Antidepressants cause alcohol cravings strong enough to overcome all the signs now in restaurants telling women to avoid alcohol if they are pregnant.
There are no signs about avoiding antidepressants or related drugs even though despite women in general drinking far less alcohol when pregnant we have dramatically escalating rates of “neurodiversity” and “gender fluidity”.
Do Not Acknowledge
It seems almost for certain that most birth defects stem from environmental causes. But industry’s (not just pharma’s) message to doctors and politicians is a Dalek like – DNA, DNA, DNA. Tell women birth defects stem from their DNA.
How do we get the right message into our DNA. What is it about industry’s ability to play on our guilt that lets them get us to do things we know are risky at the very time we are trying desperately to avoid taking risks?
Answering this would be a useful contribution to WBD Day.
(Does the non-Anglo world – and this includes America – know about Daleks and Dr WHO and the phrase Exterminate, Exterminate, Exterminate?).
John says
are these birth defects in reference to pssd as well ? Will pssd patients male wise have impaired sperm ? As well as cause defective children ? Or even infertility ?
Dr. David Healy says
PSSD isn’t known to cause birth defects but being on SSRIs does. SSRIs reduce male sperm counts more effectively than almost anything else and there are studies suggesting that the fathers on SSRIs where the women isn’t are more likely to have children with birth defects/behavioural issues. But this data is for people on treatment – not for people who have stopped.
DH
Johanna says
You could write a book about the inappropriately-soothing pablum presented on the CDC website about meds and birth defects — especially meds for mental health concerns. But the most interesting (and appalling) news was about “ongoing research.”
What if research on the long-term effects of tobacco were turned over to Philip Morris or RJ Reynolds? What if Monsanto were in charge of all public research to determine if its pesticides caused cancer? Hopefully there would be a riot or two.
But that’s the situation we are in with “mental health medications.”
The CDC encourages women taking these drugs to sign up with a Pregnancy Registry if they are pregnant or want to become pregnant. But who is running these registries? Not the CDC, whose funding has been steadily cut as the scope of its responsibilities rises (think COVID-19). No, they are run by the Center for Women’s Mental Health at Mass General Hospital in Boston–in partnership with the Sponsors.
https://womensmentalhealth.org/research/pregnancyregistry/antidepressants/
https://womensmentalhealth.org/research/pregnancyregistry/atypicalantipsychotic/
Current Sponsors of the Atypical Antipsychotic registry are Otsuka (makers of Abilify); Alkermes (makers of depot injections for Abilify and other drugs); Sunovion (makers of Risperdal and Invega); Teva (leading makers of clozapine products); and the newest, Sage (makers of Zulesso/brexanolone, the brand new $34K injection for postpartum depression). Current Sponsors of the Antidepressant registry? The exact same companies, minus Sage.
Past Sponsors since 2009 are the same for both drug classes: Forest, AstraZeneca, Janssen and Pfizer. All have now dropped out of the Sponsorship Game (as their patents expire, perhaps, or as the news gets harder to massage).
annie says
Some past revelations; a bit of historical background …
CDC Leads SSRI Disinformation Media Blitz
July 20, 2007, 8:30AM. By Evelyn Pringle
https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/legal-news/ssri_birth_defects/ssri-cdc-01162.html
Washington, DCIn a June 27, 2007 press release that made headlines all over the world the US Centers for Disease Control announced that birth defects associated with the use of antidepressants by pregnant women are rare. As proof for this claim, the CDC cited two new studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
Over the following 2 weeks hundreds of stories magically appeared in newspapers with headlines splashed all over the internet and “medical experts” appeared live on all the major television networks to tout the new studies as major health “news” in a well-coordinated media blitz clearly aimed at promoting the sale of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants (SSRIs) to pregnant women.
Because most news stories on radio and TV are nothing more than a rehashing of stories published in newspapers, the book notes, the news Americans receive every day amounts to nothing but propaganda.
The success of the media backed campaign to sell SSRIs to pregnant women by discounting the years of studies showing serious harm to the fetus is clear evidence that “disinfotainment industry” is still paying high dividends to all shareholders in the US.
GlaxoSmithKline Sued Over Paxil Birth Defects
http://www.prijatelji-zivotinja.hr/index.en.php?id=651
Paxil Birth Defect Lawsuits Settled For $1.14B
https://www.aboutlawsuits.com/paxil-birth-defect-lawsuits-settled-11599/
CDC Downplays Birth Defects of SSRIs to Boost Sales
By Evelyn Pringle
On June 27, 2007 Bush’s Big Pharma friendly
CDC issued a press release clearly aimed at increasing the sale of SSRIs to pregnant women.
https://www.opednews.com/populum/page.php?f=genera_evelyn_p_070724_cdc_downplays_birth_.htm
“Use of certain antidepressants, selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors most commonly known as SSRIs, during pregnancy does not significantly increase the risk for most birth defects,” the CDC wrote.
L says
Showing one’s face on such a subject is not easy. the voice is a little more easy. I told my story a little. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuShzfk0aZA
I know this does not reflect the experiences of many of you. I have “only” sexual dysfunction and I still have some sexual desire. I would like to invite you to make an audio recording to share your experience.
Daryl Brown says
This is a great idea. I once created a video for people to use and download and edit till their heart is content) as a collaboration (like the PFS community are doing now and like the Benzo harm community did) that nobody was interested in using at the time called hidden identities, It can be edited so people can only see feet, a curtain or nothing at all an empty room. But maybe people were too hopeful in the idea that the BBC would swoop in to report PSSD and save them.
You are free to download and edit it till your hearts content, it is nothing special but I tried.
Hidden Identities
https://youtu.be/hwDrIrqPy_o
I also know how to scramble voices like the BBC programs (Panorama etc.) do.
Good suggestion L be better to follow your lead than to rely on the BBC or any other establishment media’s non-existing good will.
susanne says
NDA Filing for Luye Pharma’s Antidepressant Drug LY03005 Accepted by the U.S. FDA
Mar 04, 2020, 08:27 ET
SHANGHAI, March. 4, 2020 /PRNewswire/ — Luye Pharma Group has announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has reviewed and accepted the filing of a New Drug Application (NDA) for LY03005, a new chemical drug for the treatment of major depressive disorder. LY03005 is the company’s second drug in the central nervous system (CNS) therapeutic area currently in the U.S. FDA’s NDA phase.
LY03005 is an exclusive CNS product developed under Luye Pharma’s New Chemical and Therapeutic Entities (NCE/NTE) R&D platform, and is a serotonin-norepinephrine-dopamine triple reuptake inhibitor (SNDRI), with one of the active metabolites being a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI). Luye Pharma has obtained patents covering the chemical compound, crystal form and formulation of LY03005. The patents relating to the chemical compound and crystal form have been granted in target markets such as China, the U.S., Europe, Japan and Korea.
Depression is one of the most common CNS diseases, with more than 300 million patients around the world. It is the leading cause of disability worldwide and a major contributor to the overall global burden of disease. According to the data from IQVIA, the market size for anti-depressants in the U.S. in 2018 was USD 4.74 billion, with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 7.3% from 2016 to 2018.
Patients using traditional anti-depressants such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) are typically associated with disadvantages such as anhedonia, sexual dysfunction and the inability to improve cognitive impairment. Compared with traditional anti-depressants, SNDRI is expected to be relatively beneficial in helping preserve patients’ sexual function, as well as maintain a better safety profile, produce a more rapid onset and provide better efficacy, addressing currently unmet medical needs.
“The global patient population affected by depression and other CNS diseases is large and growing, with serious distress caused by these diseases greatly affecting both patients and their families. We look forward to bringing more high-quality and innovative drugs to the market, helping these patients in need”, said a senior management representative from Luye Pharma Group.
The CNS therapeutic area is one of Luye Pharma’s core therapeutic areas. The company has formed a robust product pipeline in this field, covering depression, Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and Alzheimer’s disease, among others, with a number of investigational drugs already in the late clinical trials and NDA phase in the U.S. and Europe and other major global markets. The company is working tirelessly to accelerate the development and launch of these drugs in order to benefit more patients worldwide.
About Luye Pharma Group
Luye Pharma Group is an international pharmaceutical company dedicated to the R&D, manufacturing and sale of innovative medications. The company has established R&D centers in China, the U.S. and Europe, with a robust pipeline of nearly 40 drug candidates in China and more than 10 drug candidates overseas. Along with a number of new drugs and new formulations in the central nervous system and oncology therapeutic areas under study in the U.S. Europe and Japan,
Luye Pharma is developing a global supply chain of 7 manufacturing sites with over 30 production lines in total, establishing GMP quality management and international standard control systems. With more than 30 products covering central nervous system, oncology, cardiovascular, metabolism and other therapeutic areas, business is conducted in over 80 countries and regions around the world, including the largest pharmaceutical markets – China, the U.S., Europe and Japan, as well as in fast growing emerging markets.
SOURCE Luye Pharma Group
DWR says
Do we know whether paracetamol, taken in the first three to four months of pregnancy for influenza, at that point in the development of the foetus, could cause ADHD or any other neurological problems?
If people use paracetamol to help them through the flu-like symptoms of possible coronavirus, should they be made aware of this.
Dr. David Healy says
Paracetamol certainly has a potential to cause problems in that it works on the serotonergic system. It would be worth checking out the data on this topic and see what has come up
D
Dr. David Healy says
Re paracetamol – acetaminophen and birth defects
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26688372/
and
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24566677/
David
susanne says
By PHIL GALEWITZ — KAISER HEALTH NEWSMARCH 9, 2020
Bayer Aspirin
The large red-and-white bins at Walmart pharmacies across the country read, in bold all-caps type: “Approximately every 40 seconds an American will have a heart attack.”
Inside the three-foot-tall cartons, adorned with the American Heart Association and Bayer logos, were dozens of boxes of low-dose Bayer aspirin.
The implication was that everyone could reduce their heart attack risk by taking a “baby aspirin.” But recent studies have found that’s not the case.
After Kaiser Health News inquired about the marketing bins, the heart association late last month said it is having Bayer, one of its major donors, pull them from Walmart, although the campaign was supposed to finish by the end of February anyway. But 10 days later, on March 5, a reporter shopping at a Walmart in Florida found a bin still on display. About a quarter of Walmart stores nationwide displayed the bins,
“This was a misstep,” said Suzanne Grant, a spokesperson for the American Heart Association. “It was a human error
Related: First it was aspirin, then Xarelto. What’s Bayer’s next big thing?
The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, an expert panel that makes recommendations on medical care, is reexamining its guidelines, which advise low-dose aspirin for people ages 50-59 who have a risk of cardiovascular disease and no history of bleeding problems. It also has noted that individuals ages 60-69 at risk of heart disease may want to consider the therapy, but it should be used selectively. Evidence for other age groups is inconclusive, the task force says.
Grant said the association approved the marketing bins without including “precise language” explaining that people need to talk to a doctor before taking aspirin regularly. That language is printed in smaller type on the Bayer baby aspirin packaging.
The bins promoted the heart association’s “Life Is Why We Give,” a fundraising effort. Bayer is a financial supporter of the campaign.
The heart association reviews all products and marketing that contain its logo, Sanchez said. It is unclear why or how the association allowed this display to occur.
Chris Loder, Bayer’s head of external communications, issued a statement saying, “Any inference that Bayer’s demonstration of support for the AHA’s heart health initiatives could be construed as medical advice is simply preposterous. The display contains no medical claims whatsoever and is merely intended to help the AHA raise awareness of a major public health
But it also illustrates potential problems when large pharmaceutical companies team up with nonprofit health groups. Arthur Caplan, a bioethicist at New York Universi
Bayer gave nearly $1 million to the American Heart Association in the most recent fiscal year, according to the association’s latest financial records. In all, the association received about $33 million from drug companies, medical device makers, insurers, and health firms. It does not endorse any particular product.
But Caplan said the marketing displays at Walmart imply that AHA endorses the Bayer aspirin
Doctors say they worry many patients still routinely take aspirin for protection without advice
till, Dr. Erin Michos, one of the physicians who helped develop the heart association’s new position on aspirin last year, said she has seen patients who should be taking aspirin who have stopped because they heard about the new guidelines. “There is a lot of misunderstanding,” she said.
susanne says
Antidepressants Linked to Miscarriage Risk
Researchers See Possible Connection Between SSRIs and Miscarriages
By Katrina Woznicki
FROM THE WEBMD ARCHIVES
June 2, 2010 — A Canadian study of more than 5,000 women shows an association between taking antidepressants, particularly the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) such as Paxil, Prozac, and Zoloft, and an increased risk for miscarriage. But researchers caution that this association does not imply a cause-and-effect relationship.
The study is published in the June issue of the Canadian Medical Association Journal.
Researchers from the University of Montreal and the CHU Sainte-Justine Mother and Child University Hospital in Montreal analyzed population data from the Quebec Pregnancy Registry. They identified 69,742 pregnant women from the registry, including 5,124 women who had had a miscarriage during the first 20 weeks of pregnancy; 51,240 women who did not have miscarriages served as a comparison group in the study.
The women ranged in ages from 15 to 45. The data were collected between 1998 and 2003
Among those who had miscarried, 5.5% had taken antidepressants. Compared with the women who had not miscarried, those who had were more likely to be older, live in an urban environment, be recipients of social assistance, have a diagnosis of depression or anxiety, have visited a psychiatrist in the year prior to pregnancy, have had longer duration of exposure to antidepressants, and have had diabetes and/or asthma.
Miscarriage Risk
Overall, the analysis showed:
A 68% increased risk in miscarriage in pregnant women using any class of antidepressant drugs compared with women who had never used antidepressants.
A 61% increased risk among those who used SSRIs.
A 75% increased risk of miscarriage associated with the SSRI Paxil.
A 19% increased risk of miscarriage among those who had a history of depression.
There was also an independent risk associated with Effexor, part of the class of antidepressants called serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27031036
CONCLUSIONS:
Antidepressant use in the first trimester is associated with an increased risk of miscarriage when compared with either nondepressed or depressed unexposed women, even after accounting for induced abortions.
annie says
Paxil’s Birth Defects Warning Strengthened
New Study Links Paxil to Twice as Many Birth Defects as Other Antidepressants
By Miranda Hitti
https://www.webmd.com/baby/news/20050927/paxils-birth-defects-warning-strengthened#1
Sept. 27, 2005 — The FDA and the drug company GlaxoSmithKline are alerting doctors about a new study on major birth defects seen in babies born to women who took the antidepressant Paxil during the first trimester of pregnancy.
“Healthcare professionals are advised to carefully weigh the potential risks and benefits of using [Paxil] in women during pregnancy and to discuss these findings as well as treatment alternatives with their patients,” the FDA says in a news release.
Paxil Linked to Twice as Many Birth Defects
GlaxoSmithKline recently conducted a study of major birth defects in infants born to women who took antidepressants (including Paxil) during the first trimester of pregnancy.
In a study of more than 3,500 pregnant women, Paxil was linked to twice as many major birth defects as other antidepressants, according to the FDA.
Birth defects are very rare in the U.S., and it’s not certain what role, if any, Paxil played in the birth defects seen in the study, notes GlaxoSmithKline.
Changes have been made to the labeling information on pregnancy precautions that accompanies Paxil, says the FDA.
GlaxoSmithKline is a WebMD sponsor.
mary H says
Susanne, thanks for reading our post ‘A Hero Moves On’ on our website ‘prescribedmedicationwithdrawalpeersupportprestatyn.org’, and for your comment that you didn’t know that our ‘hero’ had moved on! I had sent a comment to David’s Blog a few weeks ago stating that fact and how we felt about it etc. However, before it appeared, David’s new book came out and, in that, it states that he’s now ‘Professor at McMasters’ SO, assuming that all interested in the fact that he’d moved would have purchased the book, I suggested to David that the comment was probably no longer needed. Return to our website in the next few weeks and you should see how we are coping without our ‘hero’!
Now, to matters medical. The info on Paracetamol is frightening to say the least. It’s high time we all took the bull by the horns and STOPPED using medications so freely I feel. In my younger days, well before the days of Calpol etc.!, I cannot remember there being a medicine chest or first aid box of any sort in the house – and yet we all survived. To be honest, I can recall more tinctures etc. for the farm animals than for the farmhouse dwellers!
susanne says
Thanks Mary – I have publicised the book but missed the relevance of David being at McMasters. I thought he was kind of affiliated. I will of course return to your next post to see how you are ‘dancing in the rain’ as ever .Sorry I skipped over the last one.
I have mentioned to David that lobbying and publicising his work may have to change as far as those of us who are contacting people over here are concerned as ‘they’ will have even more excuse to undermine us if we are referring to David as working in Canada rather than UK./Wales’, even though the blogs are international. Any thoughts?
mary H says
I know exactly what you mean Susanne – but I see this from two conflicting angles.
On the one hand, I’ve had to explain, verbally, far and wide in the local area that David is no longer in North Wales. The reasons for this are as follows:- . many who attended our Open Meetings are constantly enquiring about David’s next visit
. some, from further afield, are expecting me to get them an appointment with David ( which I would never attempt anyway!) so it’s far easier for me to now be able to say that he’s no longer here!
. when Shane next reduces his medications, we will need to replace David’s excellent support, therefore I’ve had to explain (the fact that he’s left) to NHS employees in order to access support. Their stock reply, whilst David was here was, basically “you speak so highly of him, he won’t let you down. I ain’t touching you while you’re in his camp”!
On the other hand, yes, of course it was beneficial for us to be able to refer to David as being ‘here’ and to have an ‘expert’ in our midst was a great point to hammer home. Having said that, isn’t it amazing how few around us seem to know that we actually did have such an important voice close by? Not one person in our area had ever heard of David until we mentioned his fight for the rights of the ‘hurt community’. Many with links to the NHS deny any knowledge of his work. Could it be that the words of someone in Canada may be more acceptable than the voice from little Wales?
Whatever is the truth, things are as they are. I am very pleased to say that when Shane had his first appointment last week, back with his previous psychiatrist, it was like having David in the room whispering in Shane’s ear. Shane can be very determined but also, as David knows, he finds it hard to explain himself at an appointment and tends to turn to me for support or to explain for him. No such problems last week! For every suggestion made against reducing further he was coming back with reasons FOR continuing to reduce. It took nearly 45 minutes and, eventually, Shane’s wish was granted. When Shane explained that even David found his case unusual, ” No wonder I don’t understand then, he’s the expert”, said the psych “You too can be an expert by the time I’ve completely withdrawn” was Shane’s reply!
My feelings are that we have been immersed in David’s ways over the last 3 years and NOONE is going to be allowed to stand in Shane’s way any more, he will fight for his rights. Before seeing David, I was already talking of Shane having being damaged by these prescribed drugs and should be taken off them. I was not believed, I was just a ‘panicky mum’. Things are now different. We know and understand so much more and no one will stop me from speaking out either.
mary H says
Hopefully of interest to many – BBC1, Thursday March 12th. Victoria Derbyshire programme 10am – 11am includes a 10 minute film and discussion about ADs and withdrawal. Members of Worcester withdrawal group ( a new group headed by Stuart Bryan) are included in it. let’s hope the BBC cover the topic well!
Daryl Brown says
I have no doubt that PSSD will not be included…
Permanent sexual dysfunction being caused by antidepressants… they can’t have the general public finding out about that. God forbid some people might want to make their own choice and consent to not take them possibly. No no the BBC will decide for you.
Daryl Brown says
Why is this considered worthy to the BBC compared to PSSD? There are treatment options for it, there are none for PSSD.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51805689
https://twitter.com/VictoriaLIVE/status/1237694505349976064
What Matt Hancock the health secretary says on antidepressants on the withdrawal bbc article Mary mentioned is laughable, they are not used in caution and he obviously isn’t determined to see that everyone has access to excellent mental health care. If he was the treatments would be tested long term for outcome and safety, drug companies wouldn’t be able to hide the harms and rates of them and people harmed would have access to help and compensation for it. Never mind the inaccuracies of diagnosing accurately dear god… He sounds like a complete shill for the pharmaceutical industry. I’ve seen plastic with more integrity and human output.
“Health Secretary Matt Hancock told the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire programme in a statement that he was “determined everyone has access to excellent mental health care”.
“Anti-depressants have a place but they must be used with caution,” he said.
“Our world-class medical staff have the skills and training to ensure they can diagnose accurately and decide on the best treatment plans.””
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51834456
I have seen no mention of PSSD or any other permanent harms in the report so far, as I expected.
annie says
Thanks, Mary
“Within a couple of days of coming off, it was overwhelming – agitation, anxiety, akathisia [restlessness], just restlessness, can’t sleep, suicidal ideations, all that stuff going on very quickly,” Stuart Bryan tells the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire programme.
‘My anti-depressant withdrawal was worse than depression’
By Alex Gatenby Victoria Derbyshire programme
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51834456
Stuart has tried to stop more than 10 times, but has struggled with what he calls his withdrawal “hell”
“Our world-class medical staff have the skills and training to ensure they can diagnose accurately and decide on the best treatment plans.”
This is patently untrue – our medical staff are not world-class, they do not have the skills and training, they do not diagnose accurately and they do not decide on the best treatment plans –
The NICE and Royal College of Psychiatrists have been more than lacklustre about antidepressant withdrawal – it is still not being taken seriously as a matter of urgency whilst countless lives are drug-wrecked and it is left up to individuals to help pick up the pieces …
Around 10.50 am
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000g6sb
What is clearly apparent, and very concerning, is that there is ‘no lead’, when we look around us …
Heather R says
Oh Mary, yes indeed it would have been of ENORMOUS interest to more than many, but wouldn’t you know it, the time allocated on the Victoria Derbyshire Show was cut ridiculously short.
This morning since 8.30 am we had already had endless Q&A sessions on coronavirus, both on BBC1 and BBC2 with the BBC’s Health Correspondent Fergus Walsh, and then at 10 am Victoria Derbyshire carried it in, getting into, dare I say it, unnecessary trivia about whether to attend weddings, and then a nice gentleman was talking about feeling lonely and lots more time was spent asking him the name of his dog. If there’d been nothing else of import, waiting in the wings, that would have been fine. I have to say, were I a politician I’d label this as filibustering to make sure that the excellent antidepressant withdrawal piece and it’s brilliant film was cut back to make sure that the planned discussion could not take place, as, oh dear, they were out of time….. the Worcester Withdrawal Group thus managed only a few words on their film. The journalist who presented it, a Withdrawal sufferer herself, was excellent.
This film had apparently been commissioned by the BBC some while back in longer form but then ‘mysteriously shelved’. The journalist did not give up then but fought to get it onto Victoria Derbyshire’s show. We have sent in our strong protest to the BBC about squeezing it back to the last few minutes of the Show. . If anyone else feels the same, could you add yours. We want it screened again, properly, along with time allowed for enlightened discussion.
Coronavirus is of course important and time devoted by the BBC for information about it important, but If coronavirus limits access to antidepressants for these poor addicted people, how on earth will they cope with the resultant AKATHISIA?
mary H says
Indeed Heather. There’s only so much that can be said about Covid-19, as important as it is for us to have the facts – the BBC coverage on Thursday was ridiculous. In fact, it would have made far more sense to concentrate on AD withdrawal from the beginning of the Victoria Derbyshire show and end with a quick reminder about coronavirus, if they felt the need to include anything extra to the previous programmes that morning.
The only positive I could see from the piece that we saw was that WITHDRAWAL was shown to be REAL, HORRID and a DRAWN-OUT experience for many. There is SO MUCH MORE that needs to be made public as regards actual withdrawal and long-term conditions which last beyond the removal of the offending drugs.
I have suggested that the complete piece should be shown at a later date and also, in preparation for it, they should consider contacting akathisia sufferers, PSSD sufferers etc. to give the topic a full stand-alone programme rather than a shared space with another topic.
Daryl says
Meanwhile In other news It has been announced that Matt Hancock the health secretary has left his role as fire safety officer at number 10 to join the cast of doctor who as a Dalek.
Matt says: “as much as I enjoyed my job reading the same auto prompter script every time babies and children got mangled from safe and effective world class medications, the possibility to become a Dalek on Doctor Who was just too inspiring a role to turn down.
Besides I wouldn’t want it to look too suspicious by jumping straight from Health Secretary into a handsomely rich retirement job at GlaxoSmithKline or Pfizer.
I would have said it was sad leaving y’all but I’m a Dalek now and the auto prompter is perfectly capable of spewing out messages of legal defence scripts every time that is needed and ignoring the mangled mental patients.
I have every confidence in my replacement and that GlaxoSmithKline oops the drug regulator is in good hands.
susanne says
Prescribed medicines: an evidence review by NHS ENgland 2019 is still sitting on the shelf as far as changing anything for thousands of people actually suffering withdrawal
I thought it was a promising opening ,the presenter was great, some valuable points were made – but no discussion just silly use of one liners by the Sue and Ryans group – those who aren;t keyed into the issue need to know egwhat akathisia and brain zaps mean in more detail I like visuals but don’t need shots of people making tea or feeding the swans – it diminishes the message – the few minutes given to the support group was insulting but they did get some good points across. It always bugs me to compare how the ‘professionals’ are interviewed in contrast in formal settings Mark Horrowitz Clinical Researcher at UCL Camden contributed to the Prescribed Medicines Expert Group (above)and his valuable advice on the V D show it seems wasn’t cut – the censors even missed cutting out the actual names of two antidepressants in his office – – It looked like the spokesperson from benzo service in Camden did have her piece cut as she surely would have mentioned that the prescribed meds service in Camden had it’s funding removed some years or so ago -or maybe her job would be at risk if she had said more – the present dependancy services there as elswhere are not independant of the very GPs and psychs who do the prescribing and ignore the advice re tapering by pushing the responsibility down the line to NICE. Why did the programme end on the idiot Matt Hancock’s statement ?. He behaves like a schoolboy just repeating his lines without knowing what he is even talking about.. just repeat ‘science’ over and over again Matt and you’ll’ be ok
annie says
I’m a bit appalled by a recent development.
Two persons who have never backed any communicable concerns around antidepressant withdrawal, who have gone out of their way to denounce anything resembling any movement towards data and transparency, are treating their twitter followers to discussions on Coronavirus.
Clare Gerada is currently self-isolating after contracting Coronavirus in New York. Her husband is wrapping himself in a Chelsea scarf…
Clare Gerada was interviewed on BBCRadio 5 live on Saturday, and said ‘it was ‘worse than childbirth’ and maybe she has ‘herd immunity’ and will be able to help more on the ‘front line’…
Two self-publicists, who really don’t realise when it is wise to self-isolate their mouths, whose silence on any contributions in favour of progress by PHE or RCP is nil by mouth (no comment), but feel their contribution to Coronavirus is in the ‘public interest’..
https://twitter.com/ClareGerada
.
There will be a lot more of this sort of thing as Coronavirus affects all our lives, but, SSRIs don’t have the term ‘pandemic’ and so largely sit under the radar and cannot be settled with blue, gold and red colours, over the mouth …
HT to John Read :
Excellent BBC coverage, thanks to Alex Gatenby This issue can now never be buried. The deniers and minimisers, Drs Jauhar, Hayes, Young, Wessely, Gerada, Nutt, Goodwin, Baldwin, etc., and the drug companies are now firmly on the wrong side of history. Well done to all involved!
Heather R says
Did anyone hear the TODAY programme on 14th March? Nick Robinson had as one of his guests, Professor Sir Simon Wessely and noted that his missus, Clare Gerada, was in the throes of coronavirus. (But apparently still doing Radio 5 Live, hopefully bu phone). NR made the point that Wessely had been asked to do this TODAY programme by phone, and NOT to come in, but Wessley told us that he had decided he would ‘as he felt there were those who would like him to’….one wonders who they could be, and why?
The Wessely interview needs to be heard. If ever he shot himself repeatedly in both feet, this was it. The message seemed to be, “yes, I know what the Government guidelines are, and they are fine for everyone else, but they don’t apply to me, and anyway I am keeping 4 metres away from my wife”. I just could not believe I was listening to a sensible human being, let alone someone in such an elevated role in the Royal College of Psychiatrists. Surely other listeners, in their droves, will have felt the same. I just hope Nick Robinson did not suffer ill effects…I sent the TODAY programme a horrified email.
susanne says
Me Too Annie – The Wessleys just couldn’t survive without some publicity on the media. Shows what a cosy club there is between the media and medical establishment. Clare is not even in any position at RCGP’s or BMA yet is constantly used as a spokesperson. Who knows who?it wasn’t necessary to interview her but Matt somebody presenter on C4 seemed to have a very cosy relationship with her. He said he was talking to her in New York yet the tag beneath her interview stated South London – odd, does C G have a clone ? Please don’t bother going in to work CG we need people we can trust on the front line – unless you have some data to share with us all? Like some truth about the number of people who consulted you with very nasty side effects from anti depressants – worse than your dose of covid . wherever she is Fergus Walsh is another BBC lackey who has been spouting the political message, rushing around hospital corridors Thanks for instructing us how to wash out hands Fergus but what we really really want is the evidence behind the decisions being made – which over 100 scientists have said is paternalistic and secretive and risking peoples’ lives. Rings a bell And while you are at it C G here’s a good opportunity -as someone in obviously a special position could you dig out some data on the number of people you have consulted but claim that none of them have suffered side effects from AD’s…
Spruce says
First it was Brexit which held up the Parliamentary cross party collaboration about PSSD, and now the Corona virus might hold things up again.
Every single time there seems to be a step forward with the truth coming out about PSSD, there is another setback.
It is so frustrating.
Sometimes i feel the truth about PSSD will never come out. I have been waiting almost 12 and a half years for the truth to come out, and it would be nice for things to go right with all of this; just for once.
Daryl says
The politicians have lousy excuses to ignore their constituents, they still discussed things they are personally passionate about (women’s issues, bbc funding, raising their own salaries) despite coronavirus or Brexit going on…
They have no excuses, the only blame is the fact that why have they not done anything when they have had the chance? I expect them to do there elected job of representing their constituents with PSSD they have had enough time too. Brexit or coronavirus or being busy is no excuse they have had more than enough ample opportunity so I expect them to help no excuses.
Spruce says
Well said.
I am sick of the excuses too. How much longer do we have to wait? We have already waited for so long.
Carla says
It seems that the Covid-19 pandemic has ‘stolen the limelight’ and has detracted the populace from the pitfalls of SSRIs and other dubious medicines.
The Covid-19 pandemic seems to be the only thing we hear about these days however, the dangers of SSRIs sadly, is never brought to people’s attention because it seems that PROFITS are MORE IMPORTANT than people.
Is this Covid-19 pandemic going to be another ploy used by big pharma to mandate vaccines and is this pandemic going to distract people from the hidden truth?
The reality is there are more people dying form SSRIs than the Covid-19 pandemic.
Where is the love when so much fear is played into the minds of people surrounding the Covid-19 pandemic.
It reminds me of the time when AIDS made the headlights and everyone treated people who had AIDS as if they had leprosy. Sadly, they still face enormous stigma, today.
It is so sad that it has come down to this.
When people need to keep their faith, more than ever, the church doors are also closing their doors to people.
Isolating people from people is going to create more problems than the Covid-19 pandemic itself.
If this is the case: hospitals, clinics and other healthcare bodies, need to adhere to the same protocols that other businesses are adhering to.~ It just does not make sense to me!
The sad reality of this Covid-19 pandemic is that those who are immunosuppressed or suffer from poor health are more susceptible than those who have a healthy immune system. We should be worried about the most vulnerable in our community.
Someone please tell me why this Covid-19 is over sensationalized.
If it is such a concerning pandemic should we not be concerned about our healthcare workers and people being admitted into hospitals?
My mind is telling me that these are the places where one is more likely to contract the virus.
With doom and gloom on the rise surrounding this Covid-19 pandemic sadly, more people are going to lose their jobs and face daunting prospects and I hope that there is not an increasing rise with scripts being handed out.
Sadly, if this happens the reality of the situation is only going to get worse.
How are we ever going to fight the enormous battle ahead of us if this case scenario occurs?
Please do not despair and give into fear because this virus too shall pass.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8OGAgC8Bcs
Where is the DEMOCRACY when one can not have an opinion about something?
Carla says
How many poor people die of hospital related deaths every year in the US?
If I believe the figures, it is approximately 98,000 people.
Does this ever make front headlines?
How many people die of AIDS, hunger, Diabetes, Cancer, E.coli infections, heart disease every year in the US alone?
I would not want to know because if I was to research it the figures would be astronomical.
How many people die of the medicines they ingest? ~ I am certain that this is underrated and most likely reported as unknown causes.
Can you see where I am going with all this?
It is a flavour of the year scenario.
Heather R says
Carla
I belong to a group email of my year of classmates from my grammar school and at this moment the shared chatter between us is quite animated as we self isolate.
I posted a piece in the last day or two,mraising the issue of the vulnerability of the elderly today, wondering whether their immune systems are weakened, like you said, from over prescription of a multiplicity of drugs so they are more at risk if they get coronavirus. I commented that for years we’d seen people our age hobbling out of the GPs’ surgery carrying huge bags of medicines, and I know Dr David Healy has often written about the dangers of being on 6-8 different medicines each day. Heaven knows what the synergistic effect is. I also pointed out the over prescribing of SSRIs and the ensuing withdrawal problems.
My school friends are what you might call liberal intelligent open minded folk, but as soon as I had posted my little suggestion, I got a lecture about how grateful we should all be about the fact that our parents’ generation were only expected to live to 69 whereas with all the breakthroughs in modern medicine, we can expect to reach 80. One, a counsellor, responded to my suggestion that if we did more talking about worries and less prescribingbof antidepressants, thus cutting the drugs bill massively, she said that the saving of so doing would not release enough money for enough therapists. I wrote about how we’d tried to avoid all medication all our lives, even the flu jabs, and that by and large, we’ve been lucky to enjoy good health. But I was very surprised by the reactive preachy response of ‘we should be grateful for medicines’ and I guess this just highlights why we never seem able to get the intelligentsia to wake up and listen. They are brainwashed by what they regard as progress. I’d much rather die aged 69 with my brain in tact than live to be 80, drugged up to the gills. Maybe they’ve been so brainwashed they’ve lost the ability to see the wood for the trees. It made me feel desperately sad. We started out as 11 year olds and had a wonderful free education. Many are well qualified professional now. And yet they don’t want to see where so-called progress has taken us.
annie says
With Coronavirus, I feel a Collective Part of Something…
With Paroxetine, the ‘Collective’ Part was scattered, far and wide, and the Collective Parties sought to ostracise, fractionate, dismiss – in no uncertain terms.
As we self-isolate in the woods, doing what we are told to do, by Governments, and the ‘Armchair Spreaders’ give vent, it might be a good time to reflect that SSRIs were not reined in when there was a chance to do so and so the ‘heady virus’ took over the world with hardly a pipsqueak to quell it – in tandem, not random, there should have been a ‘lockdown’ but they were all too busy looking the other way..
Self-isolation then, was a good training ground with an SSRI withdrawal – exile, banishment, invisibility –
and so expecting me to listen to C invaders, senior psychiatrists and gps who have made no contribution to anything to do with the dangers of antidepressant withdrawal, give me no truck …
susanne says
Top-Read Articles
Inbox
Bioelectricity Unsubscribe
Apr 17, 2020, 9:35 pm
Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor Use During Pregnancy and Major Malformations: The Importance of Serotonin for Embryonic Development and the Effect of Serotonin Inhibition on the Occurrence of Malformations
Anick Bérard, Michael Levin, Thomas Sadler, and David Healy