If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
New study calls into question the effectiveness of commonly used SSRI medication
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7263494.stm
Popular anti-depressants are of little value to all but the most severely depressed patients according to a new study by the University of Hull. This sparked a massive debate on FiveLive and the phone lines were jammed throughout.
I wonder if now something will be done to encourage what service users and advocates have been crying out for for ages - serious investment in Psychotherapy and talking therapies for mild to moderate depression...and some serious sustained support for the mental health of our ex-forces personnel.
Popular anti-depressants are of little value to all but the most severely depressed patients according to a new study by the University of Hull. This sparked a massive debate on FiveLive and the phone lines were jammed throughout.
I wonder if now something will be done to encourage what service users and advocates have been crying out for for ages - serious investment in Psychotherapy and talking therapies for mild to moderate depression...and some serious sustained support for the mental health of our ex-forces personnel.
0
Comments
These things have been said before though. I don't think peoples attitiudes to SSRI's will change any time soon though. It's almost cool to be on SSRI's these says.
Oh no no no! This is drugs territory, I've started a debate that I want to focus on experiences and knowledge of substances, not politics.:banghead:
Then Helth might have been better. That's where you've find all the depressed people.
I wondered if that last comment in politcs was aimed at me. It seems it may have been.
I've never said being depressed is anything of the sort. I don't know where you get that from.
All I've argued is that there are better ways to deal with it than dropping SSRI's.
I suffered from depression once as kid after a series of illnesses and operations in a short space of time. My sister has suffered mroe recently and for a longer period so I have experience of it.
It's more there are more effective ways of going about it.
And people that are on SSRI's quoting the 'I have a chemical inbalance' line as gosple piss me off.
It's not that I don't think depression is real illness.
It may piss you off, but real depression is a chemical inbalance in the brain. And I'm glad you're aware that it is a real illness - it's a registered illness - and many people are actually disabled by it.
The argument against SSRIs is complicated, with different people experiencing different levels of success with the drugs, if any at all. I guess it just comes down to the fact that everybody's different. And as much as I agree with your comment that there are better ways of overcoming this kind of illness, I think it's only fair that people should have the right to choose whether they're on these drugs or not, obviously with the advice of their GP. If they think it helps them, even if it's just psychological and less medical, then more power to them, I say.
Proove it. You wont be able to, because the theory that depressed is caused by a chemical inbalance is still just that, A THEORY.
I'm glad your gald.
When a drug has been shown to be at best only 20% more effective than a placebo and yet increase suicidal thoughts 10 fold, I think that people should be worried.
I havn't ruled them out as being useful, only that the way they're used now is completely wrong. My problem is the over presciption and the blind faith people have in them.
:grump:
I don't get your point.
And at this point i have to agree with Skive.
sorry, its just the way im interpreting that little bit i quote earlier... the impression im getting is that skive flat belives that its not a chemical imballance and that its something that can be decide. i know im more than likly wrong, but that little bit just annoyed me quite a bit and im not sure why...
sorry...
i give up.
There is NO concrete evidence that shows that depression is CAUSED by a chemical inbalance in your brain and there's certainly very little evidence that SSRI drugs work to somehow work to correct this inbalane.
http://www.drugsandyourmind.com/chembal.html
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/99356.php
http://www.dorothyrowe.com.au/index.php?u=Farewell_to_Chemical_Imbalance_(Jan_Feb_2007).htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_imbalance_theory
I could go on posting links. If somebody making the claim that depression is caused by a chemical inbalance could actually back up there belief with some real evidence for once, than I'd be happy to look at it. But nobody will, because they can't. Instead it'll be "They worked for me", "My doctor said they work", "I read it in the paper that they work" etc etc.
The problem is that nobody really understands how our brains work or why ome people become depressed. That depression is somehting out of your control is a very easy one to beleive for those that are depressed, but a very far from helpful one if it turns out to be wrong.
Just because there's alack of other superior theory and answers for the causes of depression, does not make this one right.
Proove that it is.
I havn't seen any decent evidence to suggest that depression is caused by a chemical inbalance. Show me some.
but wouldnt the fact that people see a difference and/or feel a difference account as some proof that they do work? i read somewhere (so not first hand proof) that people are all different and that different things effect different people in different ways... im not saying its the only cause, because i highly doubt that it could be.
this i agree with entirly (except maybe the last bit as im not sure i follow), but if they do have an effect on some people then why cant that be constituted as proof that they do work. it maybe that they are not particually effective, but that they do work.
when i see something as a theory, i see it as the big bang or evolution, solid proof that is built on a unstable foundation with holes in, but with this i dont see it the same... it might just be the way i see it, but t me, this is more like, if you drive into a 200 year old oak in your car at 70mph, you are going to make a mess of your car...
im not trying to undermine anything or say that your wrong, just trying to gain a better insight into the other side of the argument... probibly an odd choice of words ie used though...
"The most striking finding is that all 100 of those patients with significant primary depression were deficient in magnesium by magnesium loading testing, although the white blood cell magnesium picked this up only 60% of the time. Interestingly, in 47 chronic pain patients who were depressed, only 31 patients (67%) were deficient by magnesium load testing. Obviously, there will be some depressed patients who are not deficient in magnesium, as seen in 15 chronic pain patients who were depressed but had normal magnesium load tests. Nevertheless, in those who suffer from significant depression, magnesium deficiency appears to be virtually universal. Even if the 46 chronic pain patients with depression are included, of 146 depressed patients who underwent magnesium load testing, 131 or over 89.7% were magnesium deficient."
basicly 89.7% of 146 people tested were magnesium deficient. (chemical imbalance). i do not however, take this as any form of proof, but as at least a starting point that it is not compleatly useless...
i have not, however, read a vast amount of the page because im tired and want to go to sleep. and it could contradict me in every single way. i think im the point that im trying to give is that if medication is used to "up" chemicals, or change the quantities of stuff in your blood or body, how is it not a chemical imballance?
im trying.
Not a single article can be produced which directly demonstrates that depression is the result of a serotonin deficiency.
NAMI on Chemical Imbalance Belief
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ASa7iQQpOMI
Bassically saying, if you feel low go and ask your doctor for this.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6vfSFXKlnO0
Doctors, Prescriptions and coming off the drugs.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Jkxfmw0VW3w&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Sstoa406Oa0&feature=related
Antidepressants, School Shooters, & Suicide
http://youtube.com/watch?v=rtrLBYwIOZs&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Hd51-ArqJgw&feature=related
Psychiatry drugs for foster care children
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=foster+kids+ssris&search_type=
Drugs for children as young as 2
http://youtube.com/watch?v=pssR-NL_LNE
Mandatory Mental Health Screening starting with kids
http://youtube.com/watch?v=D9Q9A12634U&feature=related
Now a lot of these links concern the US, but we arn't far behind.
i will read the links and ponder...
Because in clinical trails performed by the actual companies that produce these drugs it was shown that a placebo was AT WORST as effective as the SSRI 80% of the time, often as good as the SSIR, and sometimes better than the SSRI.
That means that if you had depression and then saw a positieve effect from takign an SSRI it is MORE THAN LIKEY THE PLACEBO EFFECT.
Telling people that the illness they suffere from is something they can't do anything about without the help of drugs, is in my view serioiusly irresponsible when the effectiveness of those drugs is in question, and especially iresponsible given the fact that these drugs have some serious and often dangerous side effects.
Doctors are diagnosing people with a theory? That's wrong in my mind.
This theory plays with people lives, people are dying from these drugs, children are being medicated from early ages, people are lapping it up and there are companies and people getting very rich at the same time.
It is a theory, nothing more.
That's talking about Magnesium rather than Seratonin which is the chemical inbalance theory I've generally been referring too. It is intresting, but I still don't see any evidence that magnesium is a CAUSE for depression.
I'm totally open to the idea that chemical inbalances may be affected by depression but to suggest that it's a cause is a big step on from that, because it suggests that is the way to go about treating it.
Because it's not some harmless belief like Father Christmas. That adults and kids are getting fucked up by these drugs is beyond doubt, that they really are effective in any great way is.
The one question we should be thinking about is do the pros outway the cons of an unprooven and dangerous drug that is already being given to millions.
I've been told on here many times that I'm wrong, and that SSRI's do significantly work or they worked for me etc ...yet I'm of the opinion that claims have to be prooved, not disprooved.
ok, but you cant give people the placebo. they would consously (?) know that what they are taking will have no physical effect on them. it wuld defeat the object.
strong point. yes its wrong to say that depression can ONLY be cured by drugs, but, again, i read an article somewhere, i dont remember where, that the waiting list for talking theropies is uselessly long? giveing the only alternative the use of drugs?
arnt most medications safer now than they were? and some medications start off at smaller consentrations so as to reduce the side effects on the body?
the effects highlighted by some of the links you have already given are strong points. but i have no experiance of medication what so ever and it seems that the ones ive looked at so far are one bias. the chanel 4 one is the only one that has some vage indication, towards the end, that something is happening to change it... i think...
strong point number 2.
i didnt say that it was i cause (i dont think) but if it does cure it, what is the cause? working backwards on it: you give it a chemical, it goes away. if there was more of this chemical, it would never have appeared. so maybe its an imballance?
ok, i suppose i agree with that.
I'm not sure you get what I mean.
In trials it was shown that a placebo is 80% at worst as effective as these SSRIS.
So it's logical to assume that at least 80% of those that reported a postive effect after taking SSRI's only experienced the placebo effect, rather than the effect from any chemical in the drug.
A good diet, plenty of slee regular exercise have been prooven to combat depression. Counselling is another alternative.
They have dangerous side effects. They are addictive, they do fuck with your brain chemistry and they do increase suicidal thoughts.
I gave you some links but I also said go have have a little search yourself because I didn't want to come across as just posting bias links.
I think what you'll find is that whilst there is no definative proof linking low levels of serotonin to the cause of depression, you will find plenty of evidence that shows that these have dangerous side effects and are being used irresponsibly on a mass scale.
Who to say low magnesium levels arn't a result of being depressed and not a cause?
When people talk about a chemical inbalance being the cause of depression they're ususally refering to the theory that is low levels of seratonin that cause it - not magnesium. That's what these SSRI like Prozac do, they're Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. They have fuck all to do with magnesium.
Magnesium supplements are available but again they can have some nasty side effects, and I wouldn't recmomend people taking a drug with side effects that hasn't been prooven to work on the ailment you're taking it for.
if you gave people an empty pill, it would have no effect if they knew it was empty. so to keep the placebo effect going, wouldnt they have to put something in them to at least give the impression it might work?
as for the rest, i'll try and find out more about ssri's and anything else i can find...
the diet part has been know to every one since the stone age, even if not for the right reasons (spirits dont like moss and stuff, eat them, they go kinda thing), but i suppose people are looking for an alternative to that... might be the wrong thing to say or false but...
i'll find out more...
can i ask what it is you think causes it? other than events in a persons life? if you dont mind...
Correct.
I don't understand this 'to keep it going'?
All they have to do is let the person taking the pill believe that it'll work for the plecebo effect.
I'll give a very simplified example.
400 people take a pill.
200 of them placebo and 200 of them an SSRI.
Nobody knows what they've taken.
80 people report postive effects after taking the plaebo.
100 people report postive effects after takign the SSRI.
Using logic we can say that 80 of the 100 people who reported postive effects from the SSRI were not actually affected by the chemical in the SSRI, only by the placebo effect.
This is why personal accounts of it worked for me, don't hold much credibility for me.
In my example I've used the the same ratio of success rates found in the most successful trails of these SSRI's. Often they're no more effective at all, and sometimes less effective than a placebo.
I don't know. I think it's more to do with thinking styles and you health than anything.
But I'm not asking anybody to beleive what I beleive, only askign them not to put all their faith in somehting that really hasn't been prooven. I'm asking people not to state theory as fact, something that has resulted in dangerous drugs being given to millions already.
Anti depressants have almost become the fasionable thing to be on if your feeling a bit low and doctors seem to be handing them out far too easilly, and talking people off them far too slowly.
In the Depression thread in the health forum, I've seen people satting the Chemical Inbalance Theory as fact and I've seen people tellign others they should go to the doctors and ask for anti depressants.
When I've suggested that SSRI's really havn't been shown to be very effective and can be quite dangerous I've ironically been called ignorant, and then told that the thread is the place to discuss this.
Well I'm of the opinion that telling people there's nothing they can do about there depression without the help of a little pill is really not the best advice. But there you go.
I just want people to look and learn about these drugs for themselves, and not to out so much faith in their doctor.
No positive effect felt.
Precisely. Which is why I intend on fighting my side of this argument.
Okay, so studies have shown that some forms of anti-depressants may increase the risk of suicidal thoughts, or may exasperate a person's depression. But, as is the case on most arguments concerning SSRIs, this is still only a theory. I was once told (by a doctor, no less) that no one has yet been able to prove that this is not simply a side effect of the person's depression, as opposed to a side effect of their medication.
I've been on SSRIs, on and off, for many years. I've tried some that have had no effect whatsoever, some that have made me physically ill, and some that have - believe it or not - provided a crutch in my illness. The medication that I'm on now, for example, has been created to ease anxiety as well as depression, and frankly I tend to feel they do work.
As much as I say that, I do agree with some of the above posts that state a person can deal with depression in better ways. A bit like dieting, really, in that trying to lose weight is best achieved by both exercising AND diet; you're more likely to succeed if you concentrate on both, rather than just one. In fighting depression, I believe the SSRIs can be useful, but you also have to help yourself, and not rely on them completely.
Well fight it by backing it up with evidence then.
It has been shown through drug trials commisioned by the very producers of these drugs, that and increase in suicidal thoughts is more likely than any real postive effect these drugs have in comabating depression.
Of course we could choose not to beleive this evidence, but if you choose not to beleive that, why woudl you choose to beleive in the drugs you get from them???
A doctor no less? Must be true. Nothing to do with the fact that there's big money in the prescription of these drugs or that the doctor really hasn't got any other optins in how to treat you.
Again, just because this theory is one of the only theory's on depression does not make it correct.
How do you know that's not just a placebo effect. You can't, and that is why personal testomonies of 'they worked for me' don't hold much water for me. I'm quite willign to be prooven otherwise but you need to show me evidence. But you won't because you can't.
Can you show me any evidence at all to show me that depression is caused by a chemical inbalance in you brain as you first claimed?
Because if you can't, your belief and trust in SSRI's as an effective drug against depression is misguided.