Understanding Antidepressant Withdrawal © Coral Smith 2025
This post by Harriet Vogt follows on from her recent Ruptures in Clinical Care post
The members of Shane Cooke and Mary Hennessey’s antidepressant withdrawal peer support group decided there was more to explore together after our first meeting. They wanted to dig deeper into their experiences of protracted withdrawal. Several fundamental questions that arose from our first meeting demanded a more probing conversation:
‘How can best intentioned, good doctors, be so ALIENATED from us, their patients?’
Or as David Healy who originally instigated the formation of the group with Shane and Mary, asked – ‘how can we be so afraid of a caring profession that we dare not challenge them?’
Harriet’s Overview
As we all know in the prescribed harm community – even those of us who are unharmed – the medical system is disconnected from patients in antidepressant withdrawal by degrees of separation. There is a pharmaceuticalisation of medicine that indoctrinates good doctors – employing ‘evidenced’ guidelines based on ghostwritten trials more designed to boost returns on investment than patient safety.
It is literally depressing that those whom I have dubbed – ‘statistical lap dancers’ – are still focusing their research efforts on diminishing the perceived prevalence and significance of withdrawal.
Take, for example, the recent meta-analysis conducted by Jonathan Henssler et al (caps my emphasis):
‘Considering non-specific effects, as evidenced in placebo groups, the incidence of antidepressant discontinuation symptoms is approximately 15%, affecting one in six to seven patients who discontinue their medication.
Subgroup analyses and heterogeneity figures point to factors not accounted for by diagnosis, medication, or trial-related characteristics, and might indicate subjective factors on the part of investigators, patients, or both. Residual or re-emerging psychopathology needs to be considered when interpreting the results, but OUR FINDINGS CAN INFORM CLINICIANS AND PATIENTS ABOUT THE PROBABLE EXTENT OF ANTIDEPRESSANT DISCONTINUATION SYMPTOMS WITHOUT CAUSING UNDUE ALARM.’
Unsurprisingly, most of the studies reviewed were commercially funded.
Keeping the debate at the level of prevalence, emotionless numbers, bears no relation to the depth and duration of suffering endured by the members of Shane and Mary’s support group – and many thousands of patients across the world. The point isn’t politically motivated prevalence research gaming, but listening to and learning from patient experiences of withdrawal, how to minimise our physical and psychological pain. We are the evidence base – and the sample size is HUGE.
Withdrawal Voices
Close to the emotional surface amongst the group, there is a degree of well founded disgust tinged with fear – that withdrawal symptoms will, as has habitually been the case, be misdiagnosed as a worsening of an existing or appearance of a new ‘mental health’ condition, leading to further medication or, at worst, inpatient psychiatrisation. What is the point of seeking help from professionals who know nothing, and neither believe nor pay attention to the experts in front of them – their patients.
Listen to T who is so astute, despite severe disablement from 5 concurrent drugs, related low sodium health issues and valproate induced Parkinsonism:
‘ Low sodium causes balance problems which I struggle with. It causes depression, cramps, lethargy – an offshoot of taking antidepressants and valproic acid. Every med I take can result in low sodium.. You really don’t know what’s causing what in the end… I don’t find the doctors a great deal of help. I get worked up about it before I go. I’ve lost confidence in them – the whole thing with the mental health diagnosis – medication being left on them for all these years – and they don’t know. The thing I want from them now is support and understanding of what these meds are doing – but they haven’t got it, they don’t understand, It’s pointless.’
Or A 1, prescribed seroxat for 25 years, which made so ill he had to live in a care home for 2– and now just surviving in isolated disablement at home:
‘It’s a living hell. I’m not going to the doctor, lost my trust in them a long time ago. I was taking seroxat for 25 years terror, terror, terror – behaviour problems, alcohol addiction. I was in a care home for 2 years – in a coma for 2 months, found unresponsive during covid and developed a grade 4 sacral ulcer. I tried to suicide because I couldn’t get off the paxil. On sertraline now –. can’t even think of tapering now, still in PAWS from seroxat…You just feel exhausted, defeated – like you’ve got nothing to give any more Can’t really function – get out for a couple of hours like community centre – it felt as if never ending treadmill. On my own – it’s the loneliness, the isolation.’
There is a fatal emotional underpinning to the group’s feelings towards their doctors – BETRAYAL. They have been betrayed by one of the most universally trusted professions. Caught in an inescapable trap. Left in a state of absolute VULNERABLITY. Listen to S 1, who at a time of terrible bereavement initially found venlafaxine helpful, but now 20 years on:
‘That’s where the lack of trust in doctors comes in because that’s who you should be going to get support and advice and of course they aren’t any help. I went recently and had blood tests for B12 and the GP said why don’t you increase the venlafaxine? That was her advice. I won’t be doing that! I thought I’d better not burst into tears, that just confirms her feelings…also BEING STUCK ON A DRUG YOU DIDN’T KNOW WAS DEPENDENCE FORMING – you didn’t know that – that’s pretty bloody depressing in itself. Angry, angry, angry! Terrified to do anything different but equally wanting to move forward. You want to stop this poison as quickly as possible but actually you can’t stop it quickly.’
A sense of having been CRIMINALLY BETRAYED. Listen to A 2, another patient struggling to taper from venlafaxine, currently estimating, with a sinking heart, that it will take her about 8 years to ‘stabilise at 37.5 mg – if I can get there’:
‘If somebody injected me with heroin without me really knowing and got me addicted to heroin and I couldn’t stop, that would be a criminal offence and they’d be in prison – but my doctor has got me on something that I cannot stop and it’s ruined my life. But it’s not a criminal offence because he’s a doctor’.
As we talked together, a more profound source of patient alienation from the caring profession emerged. The way psychotropics, specifically antidepressants, are conceptualised medically, is completely at odds with our human experiences of taking these drugs – and struggling to withdraw from them.
Our experiences are not mechanistic reactions measured against the linear dimensions of rating scales nor discrete symptomology. But as S 2, first medicated at 18 and having survived 6 torturous years of withdrawal, so clearly articulated it, ALTERED STATES OF BEING, for which there is no existing framework for medical discussion. And, furthermore, another critical point, the symptoms are mostly invisible. BUT that does NOT MEAN ALL IN OUR HEADS.
‘I think one of the challenges as well – a lot of these things we are experiencing- symptoms, sensations – they’re OTHER WORLDLY…It’s very difficult to try and articulate some of these things that are happening’…you’re going to a doctor and you’re trying to get advice or tell them what’s going on and there’s no framework to be able to have these kinds of conversations…The real agony is that for so many people it’s invisible and you’re relying on somebody to try and paint this picture. People are living with this day after day, week after week sometimes for years.’
There is probably no clearer example of the existential disconnect between patients and our doctors than AKATHISIA. Described, for example in the Fluoxetine PIL as:
‘If you feel restless and cannot sit or stand still, you may have akathisia; increasing your dose of Fluoxetine may make you feel worse. If you feel like this, contact your doctor’
But, by those who have survived akathisia as – UTTER TERROR. Described by A 2 as,
‘It feels like I’m sitting on an airplane, there’s going to be an air crash – and I know I’m going to DIE.’
Unlikely that a spot of restlessness would have driven beautiful young K , to sign a preventative agreement with a physician assisted suicide organisation.
It is disturbing that akathisia is still commercially packaged as physical restlessness. We know – and research supports our knowing – that physicality is but one dimension, by no means universal and eclipsed by the iatrogenically disturbed ‘neuroemotions’ of terror:
‘Exacerbation of hallucinations, anger to the point of violence, mania, disruptive behaviour, panic attack, acting out, suicide attempt or suicidal ideation and depression have all been reported as manifestations of akathisia.’
Group insights into the experience of antidepressants went deeper still. Drugs that affect the intensity of our feelings and sensations – some terminally as in the case of PSSD – are meddling with our essential being and identity. Once again S 2 found the words:
‘I was put on it when I was 18 – very hard to make sense of who you are when you’ve been on something for decades and then you’ve come off. Deeper questions around sense of self, how do you feel your emotions?’
And giving the platform to LG – a remarkable, insightful warrior, despite having almost lost count of the number of times her iatrogenic reactions have been misdiagnosed as ‘psychiatric’:
‘THEY’RE JUST SO UNABLE TO EMBRACE THE HUMAN EXPERIENCE. If you’ve been on drugs of course you’re going to question your identity. I sometimes think who the hell am I? Are my reactions me – or is that venlafaxine speaking…Why would a doctor not think – why don’t they join the dots for us.’
This is the root of our alienation from good doctors, practising with the best of intentions. Human beings, known as patients in protracted antidepressant withdrawal, are being lost in translation. Our selves are being atomised into the disconnected bits of rating scales like the Ham-D and adverse effect lists in PILS.
This is why support groups like Shane and Mary’s are so vitally important. Their significance is not just the sharing of practical experiences of tapering. Not just extending a reassuring emotional embrace to those in desperate states of withdrawal. Their significance is that the human beings who are members of the group are able to reconnect with their true selves, to be able to discern which elements of them are distorted by withdrawal and where their authentic centre lies.
Until doctors prove themselves capable of, as LG said, ‘embracing the human experience’ of protracted antidepressant withdrawal, why should patients trust them?
Why are we so afraid to challenge the ‘caring profession’, asked David Healy? We are not so much afraid, as understandably resistant to avoidable obliteration of the self.
For Sale: Understanding Antidepressant Withdrawal
“Everyone in our group is going through a crucible and some are stuck in the fire of it, maybe comfortable within it and possibly too scared to move through it as they don’t know what lies ahead.” – Shane Cooke
Created by Coral Smith from Prestatyn in North Wales, this Understanding Antidepressant Withdrawal painting takes us through the lonely journey of removing a drug, prescribed for the patient but with next to no support in withdrawal. It takes time looking at it to spot all its features.
Coral was shocked to hear of the lack of care and support offered to many who wish to safely withdraw from their prescribed medications. She shows the doctor as the first person who meets a patient looking for better times to come. The doctor immediately offers an answer – a prescription for an antidepressant and the patient goes away ready to soon feel much better. There is dancing and happy times under a rainbow, the promise of which, unfortunately, soon changes into a deep feeling of being in a living hell, attacked mentally and physically by a myriad of extremely uncomfortable symptoms. From here, the patient reaches out for a better understanding of the suffering, only to be met by an increased dose on their prescription. As often happens, this leads to a downward spiral of misery until the patient is consumed by their tablets, having left all signs of coping with anything other than the mental and physical torture of their continued use of the prescribed drugs.
Coral has added a white dove of peace and hope. Like the rest of us, she understands that there is no “happy ever after” to many of the stories connected to these pills.
Coral’s artwork is for sale in a 40cm x 40cm canvas. We hope it will raise money to Support Antidepressant Withdrawal.
The actual canvas is more vivid and attention grabbing in real life than any photograph posted to a website an convey. To become the proud owner of this fabulous depiction of hidden suffering – if you have an offer contact ellen.hennessey@btinternet.com, The bidding starts at £25.
If yours is the highest bid within 1 month of this appearing on a Rxisk Post, you will pay in to the RxISK Research Fund as per onsite PayPal instructions and forward your address to Mary Hennessey – at the above email. On receipt, the canvas will be posted to your address at our expense.
Please share this information with all who are as concerned as we are at the loss of trust in our Care Services as outlined in the post above.
mary H. says
I would just like to make clear that what you will bid for is NOT the original painting but a print of it put onto a ready-to-hang canvas. Now please go and hunt for plenty of bidders worldwide! Thank you.
Patrick D Hahn says
Some of the symptoms of antidepressant withdrawal are literally indescribable in standard medical terminology — “head like cotton balls stuffed in” “vision lagging behind eye movements,” “brain sloshing.”
Jennifer says
Vision lagging behind eye movements struck me, as that describes what I had, and still have when driving. You are the first person I’ve seen mention this! I’m curious if that ever went away for you?
Patrick D Hahn says
A prominent patient advocate became very angry with me for a Facebook post characterizing antidepressants as “addictive.” I have great respect for the work this individual has done, but I believe she is looking for justice in the wrong place.
Antidepressants are addictive according to the dictionary definition of the word, and there is no other definition. There is no category in the DSM called “addiction.”
Dr. David Healy says
Patrick
Companies have created a trap with the word addictive. Politicians, academics, patient advocates have bought into the argument that addictive means craving and if you don’t get involved in a life of crime to feed your craving a drug is not addictive. If every dictionary in the world supports what the point you make, anyone making it risks being dismissed, side-lined, viewed as a no-nothing. This maneuver has worked well for them. You risk being not woke enough
D
Harriet Vogt says
As we know, the conflict within the meaning of ‘addictive’ comes from variations in the speakers’ perspectives – and particularly the intentions behind the use of the word.
Companies and ‘juggling fiends’ use it to conjure up images of crack dens, dirty needles and ‘addicts’ – in contrast to their ‘safe and effective ‘ drugs from which even ‘discontinuation symptoms are rare and shortlived.’
I know plenty of folks in the benzo harmed community who find it deeply offensive because of its patient blaming connotations – especially since the vast majority were taking their pills as prescribed. Their suffering is not self – but benzodiazepine induced neurological dysfunction (BIND).
I’ve seen Patrick and Johanna use it with unswerving directness to describe the carnage of Oxy. David to define a clinical state leading to specific treatment options.
The NHS has lap-danced itself into a pretzel – allowing benzos, z drugs, opioids, gabpentinoids to be described as ‘medicines associated with dependence’ – but not antidepressants ,which are somehow, magically, not dependence forming it seems, but can cause withdrawal.
https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng215/chapter/Context
Thinking from a patient perspective, I’ve always preferred the more neutral – ‘medication that can cause physiological dependence’ – because it implies the risk of withdrawal and blames the drug not the patient.
Ofc people become physiologically and emotionally dependent on all sorts of drugs that they enjoy or feel well on – including antidepressants, when withdrawal symptoms are as often misdiagnosed as relapse by patients as ill-informed prescribers. But this is heading off its pretzel territory again.
Claire T says
Very well said. Addiction versus dependence can be a minefield but is essential to recognise that it is physiological dependence. The waters do get muddied when these drugs (especially gabapentinoids) are abused recreationally and dependence is bought on through that but gets coined addiction.
Peter Scott-Gordon says
Such a vital, important, real world blog post. I hope that it will reach out and be widely heard.
aye Peter
annie says
Getting things back on the centre-ground, as Children of the Cure and Prescription for Sorrow have done, carry more weight than enormous amounts of invective.
Patrick is right. All the ‘moonie’ talk coming from patients is not medically inclined and just seems to antagonise.
Doctors have never been equipped to stray out of their straight-jacket. The jack-boots of old, plod the narrow path and nothing will penetrate.
GlaxoSmithKline spitting out Andrew Witty, Patrick Vallance and Ian Hudson, tells you all you need to know about corruption, and if you haven’t read the above two books, you need to.
There is more in these two books than tokenism will allow for.
A truly great journalist
https://plg-group.com/library/watchdog-voices-dismay-at-failure-to-police-industry-sarah/
excuses from the pharmaceutical industry,” said Paul Farmer, Mind’s chief executive.
“The public must be able to have trust and confidence in the medicines they are taking. We need to be sure that the tragedies associated with Seroxat can never happen again.”
Dr. David Healy says
Unfortunately Annie, there has been a concerted and increasingly successful campaign – especially aimed at journalists – to get people to only have trust in what research has shown and to disregard the anecdotes. Things are getting steadily worse not better
D
Harriet Vogt says
You – as well as many of those who frequent this site – have been doing everything humanly possible – for years – to force health systems to behave with patient focused integrity and prioritise drug safety over company profits. What you are fighting is essentially an information war, viz your last comment –and this line you wrote – in 1997 – in ‘The Antidepressant Era’:
‘They who control the means of data production potentially control everything’.
As a relative newcomer to this space, I find myself in a state of kind of irritable incredulity tonight.
Marion Brown, remarkable campaigner, sent through a link to an article by your comrade, Charles Medawar, whose obituary I have also just been reading – sadly.
22 YEARS AGO, he wrote the following piece – again you’ll know it, it’s new to me:
‘It is now clear that today’s anti-depressants are not the wonder drugs they were touted as being. The sometimes intolerable withdrawal symptoms that can make it difficult and hazardous to stop taking anti-depressants also expose many users to severe and depressing side effects: substantial weight gain, loss of libido, and mood changes, to name just the most common complaints.
Suspicions about such problems–especially about drug-induced suicidal behavior and sensitization to depression–have been rumbling for years, but searching scientific investigations have only just begun.
An important inquiry set up by the United Kingdom’s drug regulators in mid-2003 will soon report its findings. They will no doubt be presented mainly as recommendations for small-print changes in the warnings on drug labels and in the instructions for the drug’s use. This may help, it but won’t address the real issue: how could regulators have allowed this problem to recur after so much bitter experience, and why should they now be allowed to investigate themselves?’
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/a-looming-anti-depressants-crisis
Just the other day, Carin Smyth, apparently the Minister for Health and Secondary Care (shouldn’t we be talking to whomever is responsible for primary care given that 75% of antidepressants are prescribed by GPs?) wrote a letter (drafted by an MHRA apparatchik one assumes) to a harmed patient’s MP, including the following:
‘The MHRA has conducted multiple reviews on selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and other classes of antidepressants, seeking independent expert advice from the Commission on Human Medicines (CHM) and its predecessor where changes were required. In 2003, the MHRA was the first regulator in the world to launch a major safety review into the safety of 8 antidepressants, including SSRIs, with a particular emphasis on the risk of suicidal behaviour and withdrawal reactions. THIS REVIEW EXAMINED HUNDREDS OF CLINICAL TRIALS AND LED TO IMPORTANT CHANGES TO THE PATIENT LEAFLETS. The MHRA was also the first regulator to issue advice that certain antidepressants should not be used in adolescents and children with depressive illness. The safety reviews have led to strengthened safety measures and updated safety information to better protect patients.
Following concerns raised by patients and families about how the risk of suicidal behaviours is communicated in the patient information leaflets (PILs) supplied with antidepressants, the MHRA established an independent Expert Working Group (EWG) to advise the CHM in 2022. The scope and membership of that EWG was expanded in March 2024 to also consider the effectiveness of the communication to patients warning of sexual dysfunction where symptoms continue.
Separately, the MHRA is leading a project to improve the information supplied with dependency-forming medicines. This project aims to improve risk minimisation measures and better inform and educate healthcare professionals and patients about the risk of dependence, addiction, tolerance and withdrawal related to a wide range of medicines including antidepressants in the UK. Due to the large number of medicines that require assessment, the project will be conducted in phases following a risk-based approach, to ensure that the medicines within each phase are given the attention required to ensure a comprehensive review. The first two phases of the project include gabapentinoids, benzodiazepines and z-drugs. THE REMAINING MEDICINES, INCLUDING IMPORTANT AND DIVERSE MEDICINE GROUPS SUCH AS ANTIDEPRESSANTS, WILL BE REVIEWED IN THE LATER PHASES OF THE PROJECT.’
22+ years to ask companies to grant permission to change a few words on patient information leaflets – that almost NOBODY EVEN READS?
If this Government really wants to shrink its disability bill, then it needs to pay attention to the members of peer support groups like Shane and Mary’s. In fact, they’d learn more from spending two hours with this group of iatrogenically injured, articulate, medically informed human beings, than all the hours they probably waste in bureaucratic meetings chasing their theoretical tails.
Rose Yesha says
Harriet,
Thank you so much for your tireless efforts in campaigning. The brutal reality of psychiatric drug injury is difficult to convey. Yet, you are able to so with such eloquence and genuine empathy. I had the pleasure of attending Mary and Shane’s group. So lovely to connect with other survivors. I am so grateful to all the individuals who stand by our cause. Change has been very slow, unfortunately. People are still lulled into a false sense of safety when being presented mind altering medications. Perhaps more relatable stories need to break into the mainstream. The patient voice has a lot of power. I remember how strong I felt when I wrote by Mad in America blog: https://www.madinamerica.com/2020/07/one-panic-attack-led-15-years-psychiatric-drugs/
Five years later and I have nearly won my battle. Thank you for all the support and encouragement along the way. Thank you for speaking up!
Warmly,
Rose
mary H. says
Lovely to read your message, Rose. PLEASE share the canvas and its details with all those like-minded people your end. Complete silence this end, as far as comments or bids are concerned.
I had thought that an illustration depicting the hidden suffering would have opened a different avenue of attack – years of words seem to have almost died in the print; paint could have provided a different aspect but it seems that this isn’t opening up opportunities in a meaningful way either. Anyway, Rose, ON WE PLOD – by word of mouth, in print or in paint. NOTHING must be allowed to stop the important message getting out.
Harriet Vogt says
Thank you so much, Rose. I’ve done very little (so far), very late.
David, who could have plumped for an easy life, has been doing scientific and legal battle for truth about iatrogenesis for decades – as have most of the people connected to Rxisk, including, of course, Shane and Mary.
The problem we all face is a system which is designed, effectively driven by commercial interests – not, as it should be, patient safety. https://davidhealy.org/tangled-up-in-bureaucracy/
The challenge to all of us is how to penetrate that bureaucratic fortress and make it pay attention and act in our best interests – not their own.
Although in some ways it may feel like a weak gesture, making sure the system counts patient harms by sending in pharmacovigilance information – completing a Rxisk ProForma – matters. https://rxisk.org/snomed-your-doctor-and-you-having-an-impact/
What is disturbing is that even when harms are recognised – certainly the risks of benzodiazepines in the UK – those who have already been harmed seem to be discarded like roadkill. Again in the UK, there is now theoretical recognition of antidepressant withdrawal – but is the system paying attention to the thousands of injured dependent on peer support groups like Shane and Mary’s? Nope. Is the system hoping the human carnage will disintegrate and disappear? How much is it deliberate and how much bureaucratic process?
You’re right – patient voices have power. They need amplification – and politicisation.
inge jarl clausen says
One exit is investigating self-regulation—to see the human through a lens of self-regulation. Humans are a billion-year-old self regulated organism.
Addressing the “imperfect or lacking contact” with primary, spontaneous, biologically determined movements.
Here is a practical example from sports –
https://vegetativetraining.wordpress.com/practical-outcomes-in-athletes-vegetative-training/
Dr. David Healy says
RxISK would not normally post a comment like this which is perhaps more of an advert for a treatment approach the sender is involved with and is ‘selling’. Anyone who wants to know more can contact Inge Jarl Clausen on inge.clausen@gmail.com
D
Harriet Vogt says
I agree that this comment appears to be selling. But, Inge Jarl Clausen and I have followed each other for some years on twitter/X – probably neither wholly understanding the detail of what the other one is saying, but being in broad emotional agreement that – there must be a better way.
I believe he’s making a philosophical not commercial point about how we conceptualise health. About moving away from mechanistic, externally imposed biomedicalism – with all the terrible harms it can cause – to a person-centric, inner regulated health vision, along the lines followed by sports people.
Here’s a quote from a recent blog:
‘Cultural and Political Ripple Effects
•Malone’s post, paired with Bhattacharya’s endorsements, suggests a broader cultural shift in health policy—one that challenges the authority of the biomedical establishment. This aligns with the blog’s critique of a “corrupt” system serving corporate interests over public health. If academic centers and NIH adopt this mission, it could empower patients to take charge of their health, emphasizing self-regulation over dependency on medical interventions.’
https://vegetativetraining.wordpress.com/a-broader-cultural-shift-in-health-policy-one-that-challenges-the-authority-of-the-biomedical-establishment/
I wish IJC would say more – especially about how his theory of self-regulation might be useful for those struggling with long term withdrawal. Relating, possibly, your own notion of ‘brute exercise’ as of value in dysregulation syndrome.
Dr. David Healy says
H
Good you have clarified this. My instinct was to delete it and everything else like this normally gets deleted.
Perhaps we need to set up a forum although we have had something like a forum on DH and RxISK which has tackled some of these ideas – the posts that covered neuroplasticity – along with interactions between Neuroplasticity Therapists and Antidepressant Dysregulation
This risks sounding impolite but in the quote above where you cite IJC suggesting Malone and Bhattacharya as indicating we are turning away from biomedicine – this hits me as garbage. Malone and Bhattacharya are very biomedical and asking why the public health establishment are deserting biomedicine at a time of great need for all of us.
The same thing happens with SSRIs and suicide and withdrawal. The fact SSRIs cause suicidality is great evidence for biomedicine – the fact that public health folk like Appleby and others try to suppress this citing public health reasons means our problem does not lie with biomedicine it lies elsewhere
Suggesting to the Shane and Mary’s group they pay heed to IJC looks dangerous if he is peddling ideas like the above and is let loose on people when they are vulnerable. People insisting they know what is going on in their own body are practising biomedicine and need to be supported in this starting with all potential gurus/saviours – this includes hyperbolisticians – recognizing that if they listen to folk like these they might learn something useful – and continuing with not gaslighting people by telling them their experience must map onto receptor binding curves etc
D
Harriet Vogt says
D
I suspect IJC’s misinterpretation – aka garbage take on – Malone and Bhattacharya’s position on biomedicine is wishful thinking, But, this aspect of his analysis I guess we’d all agree with – ‘This aligns with the blog’s critique of a “corrupt” system serving corporate interests over public health’.
He’s conflating stated intentions about ethical change with dumping biomedicine – and replacing it with his own vision. A vision that I’ve never understood with any clarity – but sounds on the surface like it might be useful and relevant. I do wish IJC would tell us what vegetative training actually means – in practice.
I agree that the disasters of biomedicine – SSRI induced suicide, PSSD, valproate teratogenicity and so on and on – demand the focus of more biomedicine, not less, practiced with scientific curiosity and integrity. And the single most dangerous response to these risks and harms is burying them, as our Suicide Czar seems to do consistently. It’s like covering up landmines with decorative planting.
Apple Blossom presumably believes this is the way to defuse the political risks and keep patients who benefit from antidepressants – and we know some do – from being deterred. But it is the embodiment of the unethical, dishonest biomedicine that many of us, including IJC, have come to mistrust – the essence of what harms patients.
H
Dr. David Healy says
H
I get what you are saying. I imagine IJG’s intentions are good but I also imagine Appleby’s are too. The problem is the injured, who are trying to prevent as you say an obliteration of themselves are vulnerable to magical solutions that offer not just an answer to the physical problem but also a ‘see I told you I was right and you were wrong’.
I’m afraid good intentions aren’t enough. Marry good intentions to a hint of the possibility of making money – as in hyperbolic tapering – and you have a recipe for disaster. As HL Mencken said all complex problems have many simple solutions – all of them wrong. The worry is some look right for a while and the sharper cookies among us – to blame Peter Wood for a change – try to shake some money out of it.
I can’t stop the hundreds of thousands injured by antidepressants being seduced by an IJG or MH or PW. Not just that but it’s clear if I try – as maybe I am here – people in a group like Shanes’ turn on me. They see me as the enemy – snatching something valuable away from them.
D
Harriet Vogt says
D
An old friend of mine – not very close, but the sort of light touch, amusing person you are always delighted to see – went on a walking holiday in Andalusia last year.
He seemed fit enough, energetic, non-smoker (as of about 25 years) etc. But on this walk, he started feeling weird – breathless, tight chest etc. His g/f couldn’t get a signal on her phone – and abandoned him in that state – to go in search of help. When she eventually came back with whomever, they couldn’t find him. Seems like he’d staggered on and died – alone. Something to do with his heart – they said. I can only imagine how vulnerable he must have felt before losing consciousness.
This is an extreme example – but that sense of exposed vulnerability – is a terrible element of long term withdrawal. Humanity suspended over a void. Captured so well by S1, ‘Terrified to do anything different but equally wanting to move forward.’ And A1 ‘you just feel exhausted, defeated. It’s the loneliness, the isolation.’
Given that fundamental state of being – we can all understand the appeal of any safe space or system promising assured survival. Shane and Mary’s group is a wonderful example of a space where harmed patients support each other to feel relatively safe and their true selves.
I also dismiss any system that offers ‘off the peg’ solutions to highly individual states of toxic dysregulation. But I understand, as you will, how it can feel like a life raft to AD withdrawal survivors. Yes, they are vulnerable to apparent life rafts. Constant uncertainty is the reality – but that notion must feel extremely destabilising. ‘Stabilise’ was a word often used by group members.
I really worry about people like S1 who can barely drop a bead of venlafaxine without feeling disabled – and A2 also struggling to reduce venlafaxine to 37.5 mg scheduled over 8 years, if she can get there. There are always so many unanswered questions – if these good people tapered faster would they feel that much worse? What’s the trade off between the damage of staying on the drug longer and more intense withdrawal? Can skilled pharmacological interventions help – although I totally understand why most people never want to ingest another pill (that would be me)? Is it worth trying what you’ve described elsewhere as brute exercise? What on earth is vegetative training? I’ve got a friend in the benzo harmed community who finds sugar helpful, despite it being universally advised against. Have the drugs caused other health issues (S1 has low B12, T low sodium) that could be addressed? And so on.
I guess the vulnerability paradox is – when you’re suspended over a void, you need to feel certainty. And in any uncertain dysregulated state the reality is there is none. That’s the medical truth I imagine you presented to the group. The only way to make uncertainty more bearable is to have a knowledgeable medical partner by your side. There are very few of them about.
H
Dr. David Healy says
H
Your friend who died was in a very different state to the protracted withdrawal state. Being on the edge of dying can be curiously comforting states. Protracted withdrawal is different.
Knowledgeable medical practitioners have very little to offer here. The problem comes back to the folk on the meds who perhaps should take some responsibility – for going on the meds too easily to begin with, for not recognizing that persisting for so long with these meds defied common sense and for not doing decent research on their situation rather than waiting for some doctor to come up with answers doctors have no answer for – for not throwing off the state of passivity people often descent into = perhaps throwing it off motivated by anger at themselves for their own contribution to the problem.
This is where a menopausal model might help. This is a protracted state where I imagine lots of women have worked out and shared strategies for combatting features of the problem. But Shane and Mary’s group rejected this out of hand.
They wanted to stick with the Blessed Mark’s Hyper Model – which of course has no place for an antidote in it like Dosulepin. There are DH posts from several years ago featuring a woman who could not drop a bead of venlafaxine – she was on 375 mg – she started dosulepin and all of a sudden found it easy to stop venlafaxine. Mentioning this to Hyperbolic Missionaries got nowhere – it conflicted with the True Faith.
Women with breast cancer have shown that getting out and doing IronWoman events can make a huge difference to survival. In so far as there is an immune component to things like withdrawal, this is likely to apply in this case also.
The Australian AD data shows that older women in particular are doing something about all this with the result that fewer are starting on ADs than used to be the case. Perhaps one cause for Shane and Mary’s group to take up – rather than focus on just themselves – is to try and make a national noise aimed at alerting older (over 50) people to the need to not start in the first place.
Having made these points, one other point to make, is that while the goal might be to get off, it is also important to have the strength or ability to draw a line when a lot has been achieved and say that for the foreseeable future I am not going to try and reduce any more. The goal is to get to be able to function better rather than chemical purity.
D
Harriet Vogt says
As a clinician you know far more about death – and withdrawal – than I ever will (thankfully). I’ve had very limited experience of being with people I love shuffling off this mortal coil. But would observe, ‘anecdotally’, that an unmedicated departure feels to have been easier, with hallucinations based on fond memories, than drug induced weirdness and paranoia.
I don’t know, I thought there might be some psychological overlap between my friend, SB’s, death, literally dying alone in pain on a hot hill – and being left for dead with akathisia. But I guess it’s not really the point.
The question of responsibility isn’t straightforward either. People have obviously been enculturated for decades to believe doctors are the medical experts. They’re still the most trusted No3 on the Ipsos Veracity Index. It’s largely only when treatment fails – horribly – that patients and families start investigating. And that’s the way the system works too, reactively rather than proactively. As we know, ‘Shared decision-making’ is mostly virtue signalling tosh – but it’s not hard to be more informed than your doctor these days, by researching other patients’ experiences.
I don’t think self-recrimination is ever a positive energy source – but finely directed, justified rage can be a cracker.
Your patient experience model of withdrawal stages/phases is a great idea. As you said in the Dysregulation MiA talk – part of the distress of withdrawal is having no basic roadmap.
What I don’t like about hyperbolicity, leaving aside its pharmacological sense , is that’s it’s another drug action based theory – not a human one. After all the serotonin deficit model of ‘depression’ baloney and harm, we’ve surely had enough of that. It’s the individual’s experience of the drug that is the point.
If Shane and Mary’s group weren’t virtual, I’d suggest meeting up for boxing sessions. They don’t have to be strenuous but, at any level. its a fantastic form of exercise that works the whole body, immune system, gives you a great endorphin rush – and lets out the rage.
I’m sure I’ve mentioned him before – but I’ve an X friend called Chris Rushworth – an amazing guy. To telescope his story, he had a head injury as a child which caused frustrated behaviour misdiagnosed as psychiatric. He was drugged into disability for years. But eventually escaped his captors, terribly injured, with enduring akathisia. Joining a running club was his salvation. Here’s his story. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0Fu_Ut4iLQ
I’m not clear on the interpretation of the Aussie figures? Yes, less older women are starting ADs – but why? Have they wised up? Instead of being misprescribed ADs for menopausal symptoms, are they seeking hormone therapy instead (there’s been some campaigning around this)? We need some more insight here. I need to send you the UK figures too (memo to self).
Dr. David Healy says
H
People have been Enculturated? Women have. Men haven’t to anything like the same extent. The media are full of articles about what can we do to get men to take more care of their health/
Why are Men so resistant? Many of them say it’s because they can’t afford to have a weakness or women will use it against them. As the song goes – Why can’t a Woman be more like a Man?
D
Dr. David Healy says
Back when England controlled Ireland, an old joke had it that the first item on the agenda for a new Irish political party was – The Split.
This brings out the point that the Establishment has all the Power, holds the reins, snd who don’t need to think. It is inconvenient to pay any heed to the rest of us except if we come up with a useful idea like Hyperbolic Tapering – there I told you there is no real problem with withdrawal that a little bit of Tapering can’t fix. It’s your fault if you have a problem.
Managing the power differential, women (protracted withdrawers) used to mutter patriarchy with a knowing nod of the head. I mentioned the patriarchal element in all this in the comments on Ruptures in Clinical Care – but there was a ferocious backlash from Lucy among others who figured I was being misogynistic.
My mistake. Patriarchy was last decades buzz word. Misogyny is the current one.
Why don’t more protracted withdrawers get together and devote a little bit of time to Fun – attacks on the Establishment for misogyny. It would be more credible that ideas that seem to get traction like the Covid vaccines were a plot to eliminate a lot of people and solve the overcrowding crisis. There are loads of documents showing that companies very deliberately targeted women as the market for antidepressants.
Riding a Misogyny bandwagon might get the attention of younger women – who could campaign to solve the InCel problem by making young mane Pharma-Cels – totally uninterested in sex or unable for it because of their meds. Get the Tates on mandatory depot SSRIs. Scope for a bit of light relief and maybe even some change.
D.
Harriet Vogt says
As I recall, what earned you the virtual clip round the ear was suggesting – no, asserting – that women were responsible for the male ego, especially the overweening ones of male doctors!
But I do think there’s lots of scope – and riotousness – to be had in a campaign based around Misogyny in medicine, Pharma-cels etc. It also has the power of a double bind – naysayers can’t say nay without incriminating themselves.
Dr. David Healy says
H
I began to respond to this but the response seems to have gone walkabout. Back when England controlled Ireland and still today while they control Wales, it was common to hear Anglos say they found the Irish devious and you can still hear some of them say the same about the Welsh. They viewed the Irish as irrational, emotional, feminine and the Irish stereotype is a beautiful somewhat cerebral woman – Erin – in contrast to a beefy not so bright looking John Bull.
If you don’t have the same loud voice, along with height and strength advantage of the other party, and especially if you are smarter than the other party, you have to outwit them – leaving them thinking you are devious.
There is lots of scope for fun and games. The problem is thinking that, even though they aren’t as smart as you, we still need them and whisper it – they can be cute. The misogyny comes from them figuring they’re being laughed at behind their backs. hard to know how to convince them they are only imagining it
D
Anne-Marie says
My experience of withdrawal wasn’t planned and all happened as I went along.
2001 Feb I think I tried to come off seroxat because of overwhelming side effects was given setraline instead. If I remember correctly I went down from 20mg of seroxat to 10mg and then tried to jump over to setraline. It didn’t work I had to go off sick as I was in a storm of effects. Looking back I think it was part side effects of seroxat and setraline and withdrawal effects all combined together but at the time I thought the setraline was worse than the seroxat and didn’t even consider i was also suffering the withdrawal effects. I was in a mess so decided to stay on the seroxat and ditch the setraline. I thought it better to stick with the devil you know seroxat than try the new drug that I thought was worse. I got it wrong and stayed on the seroxat for another few years.
Move on a few more years and I couldn’t tolerate the seroxat anymore this is when I switched over to citalopram. I again lowered seroxat to 10mg the went over to 10 mg of citalopram. It was a bumpy switch but this time I had realised I was suffering withdrawal side effects from seroxat but I made myself ride the withdrawal just to get off the seroxat. It was hard for a few months or a year but it eventually levelled out. I was now suffering citalopram side effects which made me feel more energised, detached e.t.c
After a few more years of mayhem I then dropped down the mg of citalopram and switched over to mirtazapine. Mirtazapine was not a good switch either I had withdrawal that lasted over a year but symptoms kept reducing all the time in severity over time. I was aware of the withdrawal now and decided to just stick with it and hold on and hoped it would eventually stop. It did again lesson over time and I levelled out on mirtazapine.
Coming off mirtazapine was not as hard for me as Coming off the ssris probably because I didn’t feel detached on it and it had less side effects.
What I found helped me in withdrawal was learning about the withdrawal effects first. I also think maybe trying to dip your feet into the water of withdrawal to get a feel of what to expect a few times first before you withdraw completely will also help so you know what to expect. Doing this a few times helped me I think prime me up for the final withdrawal faze. I found every time I drunk alcohol I was also entering a withdrawal stage so got used to this feeling and what to expect.
When I finally withdrew from mirtazapine I was determined to get these drugs out of my system. I was sick of side effects and Mirtazapine made me feel paranoid and depressed. I felt like I had a dark veil over my head. So I reduced the dose over several months and at my worst I just didn’t go out at all. I stayed in and sweated it out but I knew now mostly what to expect and just prayed it didn’t go on for too long.
Educating yourself about withdrawal and what to expect is very important so you know what’s happening to you. It’s the not knowing that causes people the most problems, I think. I think that side effect of akathisia and loss of impulse control is the hardest one to deal with because even with knowledge it can come out of nowhere at lightning speed you would still struggle with how to deal with that effect. Maybe this is where having some diazepine on the side to take to help get you through that faze.
They really are horrible drugs to get off. I wish I knew more to be able to help. This is just my own personal experience. I don’t like advising people on withdrawal because it’s different for everyone and what I did may not help someone else
Dr. David Healy says
Great comment – thanks for this. It brings us back to the key problem but given the earlier comments I (a man) can’t help bringing us back to the other issues clustering around this key problem.
There are tons of women out there, more than there are men, who have a huge amount to add to the conversation as Anne-Marie has done here. But are they held back by female abilities to recognize complexity and that one person’s solution is another person’s problem? In this the menopause offers another good example of complexity in action and the care needed to navigate something like this.
With the exception of Harriet (and Mary) women will be slow to add a comment like Anne Marie’s – perhaps feeling the need to seek approval first. The contrast with Mark H (sorry Mark) is striking. Mark ended up in many respects in a worse position than Anne-Marie – stupidly he ended on far more drugs that she was on. But a man who gets off, or just tries to get off, will then have much less doubts about how to do it. Having a louder voice, being willing to jump into conversations or presentations on the topic – I’m a man, of course they are going to be interested to here what I have to say – helps .
Are these internal shackles that bind women? Internal or external – how can they be shaken off? How do we get to a point where the Chair of the Meeting says – ‘Guys – sit down and listen’.
D
Anne-Marie says
I think I know what your trying to say but I might be wrong. Men I find can see things as very black and white whereas women see things more in depth and see complexities more often.
Maybe it’s to do with different hormones and women having babies and needing to be more observant in childcare or Maybe I’m talking shit lol but hormones probably do make a big difference.
I’m terrible at trying to explain myself, I know what I want to say but struggle to find the words to express myself.
Dr. David Healy says
Men don’t realise they’re terrible at trying to explain themselves and if you don’t get the point they blame you not themselves. If mothers didn’t dote on them so much, it might be different
D
Anne-marie says
I think women don’t mind telling of their experience but would more likely fear telling someone to follow their experience incase it could backfire and harm someone instead. They don’t totally trust their own advice unless their 100% sure. They probably do also worry about people disputing their experience and not being able to defend themselves puts them off speaking out especially if speaking out in a structure of professionals who they feel know far more than they do.
Just some examples of why women might not want to speak out.
They may feel more comfortable in their own peer groups.
Dr. David Healy says
Maybe then rather than individuals, it needs a message from the N Wales peer group and other peer groups. The worry is though that they will just endorse some man as Shane and Mary’s group endorsed Mark H.
It would be good to get something happening here as well as elsewhere. Just so readers know – if you go back and check the comments after Ruptures, Lucy’s comments about me being misogynistic and insufferably arrogant got posted. If looks like I have the loudest voice because I can control what get’s posted or respond. It has to be true to some extent but not totally
D
mary H. says
Quite a few bits to comment on here! In the first place – “still today while they control Wales”, is just what others like to think! WE don’t see it that way. Haven’t you heard that every time an English person walks into a pub in Wales, we immediately change our language so they can’t understand us – Really? That doesn’t sound as if they CONTROL us does it! (I just wish that we had enough speakers of the Welsh language for that to be true actually!)
Now to more serious issues. One major issue in all of this is the fact, as I’ve said many times, that if you haven’t witnessed the intense suffering then you can’t really appreciate its depths. In those despairing days, there are no words to put the true picture across. This came out in Harriet’s second meeting with us – that language becomes inadequate when trying to put the suffering into words. It is only in closely observing the situation that one can truly begin to understand the extent of it – something that, unfortunately, you get plenty of practise in doing if the person going through it happens to be in the same house! Not only is the pain relentless, it is also beyond the comprehension of those trying to offer support. I agree with Anne-Marie that every person’s withdrawal is unique. Of course there are similarities but that is as far as it goes. One of the greatest successes of running the group is hearing someone ask “Have any of you had this experience……….” and the nodding that goes with the rest of that share – they are all on the same page – but they SUFFER it as individuals. Noone can say HOW GREAT is the suffering or WHOSE suffering is the deepest – ALL they can do is share the fact that “yes, I’ve had that”. The relief on the first person’s face is beyond belief – they suddenly feel that they ‘belong’ – that they are with people who understand the depth of it all. THAT, to my mind, is why the most popular speakers that we have, are the ones who have gone through the same suffering – or still are to some extent. It makes very little difference whether it’s a male or female – the attachment is to the suffering, not to the individual as such.
When you last met with us, David, the second group who join us for our speaker meetings were very new to meeting by zoom. Their group was just getting settled and really knew very little about us as a group, our link with rxisk/DH etc. They had expected a straightforward Q&A session, as we had suggested, and were possibly left feeling that their request hadn’t been listened to. Their reactions, to their leader, and from there, on to me, – so not to me personally – were then passed on to you. To me, that is the only way to move forward – to share reactions to matters that seemed to have hurt feelings within that group.
Only time will tell whether there is now more trust in what you have to share – my hope is that they now know our ways better and that they will VOICE their displeasure during another meeting with you, should the need arise.
To finish, if the day dawns that any one person who meets with us manages to get a chuckle out of all of us, that will be the time to start trying different ideas. Until then, we need to quietly work in the background and keep them informed of all that we are attempting to do. By doing so, we show that we believe their suffering and their wish for it all to end as soon as possible – and they, in turn, will realise that actually we’ve been trying every which way for many , many years now…….and still feel as if we’re battling on a very steep slope.
We need to work together at all costs.
Dr. David Healy says
Mary
You’re ducking the issue. The issue is not articulating all the effects of withdrawal. The issue is tackling doctors who are supposed to listen to and support but whose job – even when they are women – becomes difficult because everybody is scared to say Boo.
This is not just about withdrawal. It’s across the board. Its about power and how to tackle it and why we allow an imbalance in an area that is supposed to be about support not support conditional on obedience or obey or I’ll strike you off my list. Withdrawal is important but don’t let it become a figleaf for avoiding tackling something else
D
mary H. says
Whatever we do, however we do it – it’s done for the benefit of those most in need of the changes that we aim for. We cannot dictate, we can merely suggest. Each step of the way, each suggestion, will seem too difficult for many and for that reason, rejected. It is our duty to make changes so that we can support as many as possible
to reach a goal – be it to face their GP, fill in a form etc. If we fail to do so, then we are of no use to those who are struggling and deserve to be cast aside by them.
Dr. David Healy says
M
You have been close to walking away often. Expressing views just the opposite to what you express here.
D
mary H. says
This reply is to your latest reply:- ‘You have been close to walking away often. Expressing views just the opposite to what you express here.’
I’m not sure that it’s correct to say that I have been close to ‘walking away’ but frustrated by the situation, yes, many a time. Frustrated by listening to the suffering and being unable to do anything concrete about it – yes. Frustrated that we seemed unable to move beyond talking about the suffering – yes. Frustrated when a “speaker” suggested a forward move but finding that noone felt able to support that idea, yes. Then, along came Harriet – and all the frustration melted away – well almost anyway.
By coming in from the cold, Harriet was able to listen with new ears to the same suffering as before – but she was able to use the words and create the Ruptures post.
From there, again in conjunction with the suffering and lack of trust that we witness, along came Harriet’s idea of a Proforma for use to approach a GP without needing a face to face meeting. SNOMED codes went into the proforma, thereby carrying out our mentioned “speaker”‘s suggestion.
The group felt that we could provide more information for Harriet, which was followed through – and we have the present post.
Seeing how well the group had been able to express themselves to Harriet in the first place gave me the idea of asking for those ‘feelings’ to be put into picture form. Knowing of Coral’s artistic flair and her political depictions of many recent world news stories, she willingly came on board and created her understanding of antidepressant withdrawal. I imagined this as a way for those who had experienced withdrawal problems to be able to see and show exactly what withdrawal may entail. Sadly, it doesn’t seem to have caught the imagination of anyone so far – but there is time yet!
We also have a couple of other matters that we are attending to as well – both as a result of the proforma sheet and in broadcasting the work that we have done with Harriet.
As things stand, there is no time to feel the frustration of being at a standstill – I only wish that each group member had the same feeling as I do. Long may it last!
annie says
Imagine two scenarios, where one is stuck on the drug and the other cannot contemplate swallowing it ever again
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-7202413/I-hope-spared-hell-went-depression-pills-says-NHS-psychiatrist.html
I made four attempts on my life in the space of roughly 45 minutes with gas and knives and rope after a doctor’s advice that cold-turkey was not a problem. The psychiatrist doubled the does to 40 mg. A month later the hospital pharmacist drew up the withdrawal plan, to reduce the tablets first and then go on to the liquid formulation. At the end of this, I was climbing the walls again but there was no suicidal ideation just three months of horrific withdrawal. As I knew it was the Seroxat, which in fact was given for weird reasons, I left all thoughts of SSRIs and Benzos well and truly out of my life
Dear Healthcare Professional,
Notification of Seroxat® (paroxetine hydrochloride) 10mg, 20mg and 30mg tablets discontinuation
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/67bde6b1729cf14d438d76c8/Seroxat_DHPC.pdf#:~:text=GSK%20has%20notified%20the%20MHRA%20and%20DHSC%20that,Seroxat%C2%AE%2010mg%20from%20November%202025%20for%20commercial%20reasons.
To be honest, Billiam James artwork was second-to-none and he did a great job in his Akathisia portrayal.
https://www.billiamjames.com/
‘Knowledgeable medical practitioners have very little to offer here. The problem comes back to the folk on the meds who perhaps should take some responsibility – for going on the meds too easily to begin with, for not recognizing that persisting for so long with these meds defied common sense and for not doing decent research on their situation rather than waiting for some doctor to come up with answers doctors have no answer for – for not throwing off the state of passivity people often descent into = perhaps throwing it off motivated by anger at themselves for their own contribution to the problem.’
I totally agree with this and DH Blog and Rxisk.org since 2012 have shown us completely the history.
ANON says
THERE IS NO PROPER CONTROL STUDY for so many pharmaceutical drugs.
Some pharmaceuticals save lives but how many KILL lives and induce many health issues.
It seems like regulatory oversight of pharmaceuticals is minimal and any preclinical work seems to be almost voluntary.
The amount of criminal incompetence is staggering.
Drug companies are responsible for maiming and killing millions of people.
How much of the data is released before a drug makes its way to the market.
Taking in all misinformation about pharmaceuticals safety, effectiveness and efficiency, is a smoke screen covering nefarious intent.
Where is anyone going to get the evidence that a pharmaceutical, they are prescribed is safe and effective?
What real evidence do the people have to rely on?
What reliable data can the common person rely on?
Victims continue to be gaslighted if they speak up.
It seems like the injured have been failed by everyone!
Harriet Vogt says
I’ve not encountered much misogyny in my life. Except as the only woman on the board of a comms agency – me, plus 10 men. Their preoccupation seemed to be with impressing each other – and doing that ‘hohoho’ blokeish laughter business, like they do standing at 180% to each other in pubs, and I assume when having a communal pee. I was indulged as the pet female – but whenever I ventured into ‘brutal frankness’ about a business problem, they’d do their best to suppress the threat from the alien, emotionally direct species.
I’ve heard you say you don’t understand women – which I’ve always dismissed as a charming affectation. But I think you’re right – we can never truly understand what it actually FEELS like to be the opposite sex – or, in contemporary culture, the endless number of different sexes. I interrogate my extremely long–suffering male friends to get under their emotional skin to understand what drives them. They seem to find the process – WEIRD – but perversely engaging. I’ve even got them to explain the feelings of male orgasm – ‘like a sneeze’ (is that it?) – or from a friend minus a prostate, ‘like infinity’ (that sounds more worth the effort). But I can never fully sense what it’s like to be them.
Anne-Marie says she’s terrible at words – I think the reverse. Her summation of men as more black and white vs women seeing more depth and complexity is spot on. And it absolutely is to do with our biological selves. We’re designed to be acutely sensitive to human needs and emotions.
It’s bizarre that there has been no significant feminist outrage at the oppression of women’s greatest power – our emotionality – by pharmaceutical companies and the medical profession. Blunting our feelings, disabling our sexuality. Talk about alienating women from themselves.
There’s plenty of outrage – quite rightly – about the blatantly misogynistic and vile personality disorder diagnosis. Although – shock horror – there are some women on tiktoxicity (credit D – your clever twist) who wear it proudly. I did make a comment on your latest DH post – which is probably lounging about in spam – that included this video. I recommended taking several deep, calming breaths before viewing:
https://www.tiktok.com/@brookejamesxx/video/7297329161264287008?lang=en
And there’s also plenty of justified outrage around women having the pain of gynaecological procedures minimised and discounted – by men. But nothing significant about flattening our emotions and reducing our sexuality, or killing it off altogether. Wandering wombs, ‘Mother’s little helper’, ‘I got my playfulness back’ – the vomit-inducing ad for Effexor. But try and get off that stuff. And, as they say in the MiA piece, 82% of the ads target women.
https://www.madinamerica.com/2023/03/gender-bias-in-direct-to-consumer-antidepressant-ads-82-of-ads-target-women/
I’m fascinated by Anne-Marie’s detailed tracking of her withdrawal experiences. This point of hers is so important and synchs directly with what you’re saying about a road map:
‘What I found helped me in withdrawal was learning about the withdrawal effects first. I also think maybe trying to dip your feet into the water of withdrawal to get a feel of what to expect a few times first before you withdraw completely will also help so you know what to expect’.
I’ve heard a lot of women in the prescribed harm community talk about recovering their ability to feel as they progressed through withdrawal. And maybe that’s the ultimate goal. It’s wonderful that, despite all the awful suffering they have endured, most of the members of Shane and Mary’s group have regained their emotionality, their power as women.
Re your male vs female size and physical power comment – Germaine Greer’s response to the #METOO movement was characteristically magnificent – ‘You just punch them’. My kind of feminist.
mary H. says
“Understanding Antidepressant withdrawal” the artwork at the head of this post. LATEST NEWS.
Although we have not received any offers for the canvas as yet, a smaller framed print of the piece has been accepted for a raffle prize at a local village’s VE day commemoration in early May.If you can’t win one way – try another! I’m sure there are other ways too that we could use to share the reality of withdrawal for many people.
Harriet Vogt says
Great news, Mary.
I was just thinking – maybe one idea – Coral’s artwork could be developed into a virtual Rxisk educational card – for patients to send to their GPs, psychiatrists – and more widely to regulators, politicians, and assorted other disbelievers or harm minimisers.
Possibly using the ‘celebratory’ counterpoint of World Mental Health Day (always October 10), World Suicide Prevention Day (always September 10) etc.
Late night wild idea, perhaps…
mary H. says
Brilliant idea, Harriet. So many ideas coming along today – shall have to create myself a “priorities list” I think! Prescribed Harm Awareness Day would be another one too – we have Tshirts for that, maybe we could have the artwork added this year.
I think it will need quite intense planning as there hasn’t been any positive response from those who are/have suffered apart from Shane who considers the artwork “brilliant”.
mary H. says
As the ‘month’, that we first mentioned for accepting offers for the canvas print of the above artwork, passes without any offers whatsoever, we are asking for the last time if anyone is interested in buying it for £25? If there are no replies within 7 days then it will be withdrawn from sale.
Harriet Vogt says
First bid of £25, Mary.
I feel I need to own this.
Let me know what happens.
Harriet
mary H. says
Thank you, Harriet.
We’ll see what happens over the next couple of days – if no more bids come through, then it’s yours of course. Shall give you more details at that point.
Mary