A group of influential organizations are beginning an effort to change the entire way that psychiatric medications are named, according to a press release from the European College of Neuropsycho-pharmacology. “Doctors have found that the name of the drug you are prescribed significantly influences how the patient sees the treatment,” stated the press release.
The organizations proposing the new system include the European, International, American and Asian colleges of neuropsychopharmacology. They are suggesting shifting from symptom based names like antidepressant or antipsychotic to pharmacologically based names that focus on the pharmacological target (e.g. serotonin, dopamine etc) and the mode of action.
“In psychiatry, drug names can cause more problems than they solve; for example, a patient may be being treated for anxiety, and yet may be prescribed an ‘antidepressant’ or an ‘antipsychotic,’ and the stigma of being prescribed an antipsychotic can make the patient even more anxious,” stated the press release. “Often this means that patients stop taking the drug for fear of the association with the different disease.” The proposed change “also means that drug names will be more understandable to doctors.”
The statement indicated that a conference presentation about the new system “marks the start of a process of discussion and negotiation between academics, clinicians, pharmaceutical companies, and regulatory bodies.” The new naming system would also provide other information, along 4 components or axes. “Axis 1 describes pharmacological target and mode of action. Axis 2 describes approved indications – what the drug is used for. Axis 3 describes efficacy and major side effects. Axis 4 gives the neurobiological description.”
I have anxiety, why is my doctor prescribing an antipsychotic? (European College of Neuropsychopharmacology Press Release on EurekAlert, October 16, 2014)
Would be interesting to see how this would dovetail with a drug-based model of treatment as opposed by Joanna Moncrieff (as opposed to a disease-based model).
Psychotic psychiatry as usual. Neuroleptic “antipsychotic” carry a high risk of CAUSING extreme anxiety, as well as neurological disorders that are even worse. Just imagine the “social anxiety” patient who goes on to develop tardive dyskinesia from those drugs… smh
my freind developed extreme anxiety on so called anti-psychotics. He puked up in a supermarket due to anxiety on them. He came off and low and behold it cleared up.
So “neuropsychopharmacologists” are finally catching up with pharmacists. Every time I get a prescription I get a handout from the pharmacists listing exactly those things. “4 Axis.” Idiots.
Great. Just one more way to hide what dangerous neurotoxins REALLY are.
Oh, they might not be “compliant” and stop taking the drug bc of “stigma”??
What they should be asking is why am I being treated with an antipsychotic when I have anxiety or insomnia. They SHOULD become more anxious, stating, hey, doesn’t that drug cause TD??
Isn’t that a drug for serious “bipolar” mania or “schizophrenia”???
No, now they can be mislead and confused by “dopamine this”, “serotonin that”… Yes, your average person will really benefit from that bullshit mumbo jumbo at a time when the “doctors” ( hilarious) have not one clue what these neurotransmitters are doing in the brain.
Reminds me of the military: let’s call accidentally killing civilians “incontinent ordinance”; let’s call bombing “servicing the target” or “airborne sanitation”… Let’s hide the reality, the ugly with some creative renaming….
And, really, those names aren’t applicable bc “antidepressants” do not, as Joanna Mincrieff pointed out, since they do not “treat” depression, just as “antipsychotics” don’t “treat” psychosis. Why not just call them “neurotoxins” or “lobotomizing” or “nerve paralysing agents”. THEN ask patients if they would like a prescription.
Better yet, just label each as “poison”, with a specific number, like poison2,127??
The marketing of Prozac as a “selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor” – SSRI – was very successful for Eli Lilly (at great cost to society). The neurotransmitter serotonin became a household word, and there were marketing campaigns to convince that depression was caused by lack of serotonin in the brain. This replaced the noradrenaline theory of depression – based on the known fact that the tricyclics target noradrenaline receptors. Meanwhile, the basic physiology and biochemistry of the indole amines serotonin and melatonin were ignored, and did not find their way into psychiatric texts and journals. This included the important discovery from the 1960s that serotonin is concentrated in the pineal gland where it is converted to melatonin at night. The research that Eli Lilly and the psychiatric establishment did on LSD under the MK Ultra program is just one example of systematic secrecy about serotonin and dopamine research.
There was a similar theory regarding schizophrenia and dopamine that followed the supposed success of treatment of ‘schizophrenia’ and ‘psychoses’ with dopamine-blocking drugs. The simplistic theory put forward by enthusiasts was that drugs that were known to stimulate dopamine receptors like amphetamines and LSD caused a mental state similar to what is termed ‘schizophrenia’. This was a convenient marketing strategy for the numerous dopamine-blocking drugs that have caused so much tardive dyskinesia and Parkinsonism around the world. The problem the psychiatrists are faced with is that the new generation ‘antipsychotic drugs’ are known to affect serotonin receptors more so than dopamine receptors. They have to come up with more pseudoscience to get around the problem.
Meanwhile the fact that dopamine is the precursor molecule of noradrenaline (norepinephrine) and is known to affect the pituitary as well as the limbic system, basal ganglia and cortex explains the wide range of adverse effects that dopamine-blocking drugs have on brain as well as general metabolism. The end result is that those who are treated with dopamine-blocking drugs have their lives worsened and shortened if they are given in high or ‘maintenance’ doses. (I think there may be a role for these drugs in low dose to treat troubling auditory hallucinations).
We are told that the ‘new antipsychotics’ that target both serotonin and dopamine receptors (and many others too, no doubt including some that are not known or tested for yet) are “less likely” to cause permanent brain damage in the form of tardive dyskinesia. This is not yet known though, since the drugs have not been used for long enough – what we do know is that the new drugs shorten one’s life, and cause even worse metabolic problems (including obesity) than the old dopamine-blockers.
Changing names – or adding new alternative names – will not decrease the toxicity of these drugs. It may convince more people to take them, though.
Oh, so I guess the new names will be:
– pro-parkinsonians/chemical lobotomisers (current: anti-psychotics)
– psychosis-inducing compounds (current: stimulants)
– pro-suicidal drugs/school shooting enhancing compounds (current: anti-depressants)
Yhm, something tells me that this is not going to look like that. What a shame…a little honesty would be nice.
I like Truth’s suggestion. They should just be called poisons with numbers added since this is exactly what they are. We’ve got to get our stuff together as a movement so that we can begin effectively combating all of this bs that they system is putting out. Ted C. is right, the time for sitting in a circle and holding hands and singing Kumbaya and trying to dialogue with these people is done and over with. Now we need to start taking names and kicking behinds and who gives a fat damn about whether we’re labeled as antipsychiatry or not!!!!! If we don’t start doing something to protect not only ourselves, but especially our children, the entire world is going to be lobotomized so that we’re a docile work force for the One Percent elites!
I’ve just added a comment to a forum where a girl was asking about possible psychosis/mania after Escitalopram. Most of the answers were along: “well, it can if you have bipolar disorder and then you should ask for an anti-psychotic to be added and everything will be honky-dory”.
It’s depressing – now if you have a negative reaction to an “anti-depressant” (or suicide-inducing agent no N) you’re bipolar and need to go on an “anti-psychotic” (or Parkinson’s-inducing agent no N).
I’ve send her to Rxisk.org