Question: if Paxil “hides” 20 +2 suicides from clinical trials, has anyone ever tried to sum up what total amount of suicides has occured during clinical trials of all SSRI’s? Perhaps other lawsuits has uncovered suicides for the other brands???? Ove2017
Question: if Paxil “hides” 20 +2 suicides from clinical trials, has anyone ever tried to sum up what total amount of suicides has occured during clinical trials of all SSRI’s?
Perhaps other lawsuits has uncovered suicides for the other brands????
I would just love the day it becomes common household knowledge of the points brought out here by Philip Hickey.
Point number 4 especially: where it for some can be an aid to have some natural responses dampened or numbed, it can be utterly devastating for others. Any intervention to the delicate balance of brain chemicals, such as Serotonin and other neurotransmittors, will cause, and have caused unwanted changes in human behaviour and demenor, general health and awareness. Physical as well as mental changes cannot be predicted by the prescriber nor the recipient.
Yes, It’s good to see another voice who has experience from “both sides”. (I include “Big Pharma” on the “academia”-side, since they benefit from fraudulent science)
So, Peter Beresford, aren’t you ashamed over how researchers within the mental health time and time again display fraudulent behaviour at the cost of the end user?
Don’t you agree that if they put themselves on an “Ivory Tower”, it is a basic requirement that they also speak out about the obvious false claims they surround themselves with?
Next to being a willing particioner in a genocide, I see the gutless and cowardly “scientists”, who must know that their behaviour hurts thousands of patients to be, as equally guilty of crimes against humanity.
Lobotomy, ECT, Barbiturates, Thalidomide, Benzodiazephines, SSRI’s (I have 17 years on Paxil) stacks up to a “genocide”, or two!
To lie, and pray off of, a group that is percieved as inferior (we who seek treatment) in mental health, is just a low point in the history of man kind.
And when we criticize them, we get brushed off with yet another diagnose.
Sorry for my strong words, but we need even more outspoken people with experience from “both sides”.
Ove, Sweden 2016
Steve McCrea>>> Plz also remember to point out that this guy, Andreas Lubitz, was a pilot. Trained by Lufthansa. (Probably top10 atleast as when it comes to serious commercial airlines in the world, 1000’s of applicants) He made the cut. Even if bad apples are everywhere, a pilot is still “screened” pretty thoroghly (here in Europe at least). He had a history without major mishap. Stabile relationships (OK, so he had a mistress, he is a pilot, don’t make a man ill) He was ambitious, intelligent, physically active and came across as “stabile” enough to be a pilot. Friends of his “cannot believe he did this on purpose”. From what I know he was close to his parents/ had just left home/ no major crisis in family.
So: among us, here on MIA and elsewhere where we critisize pharmaceuticals, let there be no doubt this was a decent guy. We all have our flaws, but if anyone wants to call this guy “mentally ill” and blame it there, then they really have to work hard on getting their story to fit.
147 lives lost, countless more bereaved. And I still want to meet Lubitz’s parents and tell them their son was not to blame. Because I honestly do not think he was, and the clues about the guy says I’m more right than most.
//Ove, Sweden, 17 years of Paxil.
Thanks man, and I agree with your reply, people shouting their subjective opinions from both ends of the spectrum. (Almost) all deny the complete lack of trustworthy
science (as in: the critics tries to draw conclusions from science that was falsified to begin with, and the worshippers says nothings wrong with the science done…)
People, I don’t think it’s worth the effort, no matter how right we are that psychiatry needs reformation. “Some die crossing the streets, I lost my dignity and chance of a reasonable life to Paxil” – it’s just a twist of fate.
It’s just academic brawl again, switch to “neutral-zone-boxing” like in hockey instead, it’s more productive. Clears the air in 30 seconds or less. OK, so I’m not the best to judge, but seriously, the guy (dr. Pies) has no track record to show that he has been opposing chemical imbalance Before 2011? It’s a Little late, to me, if the same article shows him recieving GSK-Money in 1999. And no one is interested in his “constructed” explanation that he was ‘never paid to promote’. Well, you were paid. Period.
And how great to see him declaring that it was just Another story that confirmed what we knew back then. But did all available data show that a chemical cure was possible? To me that seems strange, since there isn’t any evidence today, even, that bi-polar is a disiease caused by some chemical fault in the brain? Or even a disease at all? Or is there?
Perhaps one of you wanna help me here? what diseases of the brain is there undeniable proof of, as diseases, within psychiatry,? (not neurological diseases) I know of some moods, but are there a distinct line where a mood gets to be a disease?
Philip Hickey has my vote. Great work.
Philip Hickey writes awesome articles. And he seems almost ‘human’ if you judge by the questions he asks!
What seperates him from psychiatrists is probably the paycheck, it isn’t coming from Pharma, so he asks the obvious questions psychiatrists turned a blind Eye towards.
And yes, the toll patients have been paying is enormous.
Perhaps Another year dr. Hickey could follow R. Whitaker and Delano to Gothenburg, for the filmfestival I just attended, I wanna shake his hand too!
But why is it so hard to ‘debunk’ psychiatrys claims?
I know psychiatry has Deep pockets from pharma, and intelligent, well payed academics at their disposal.
But how come we can’t silence them with the truth?
And I’m so so terribly afraid this ‘tide’ isn’t coming… or that psychiatrys ‘levees’ or ‘piers’ or ‘wavebreakers’ are many.
What can I do, as a layman patient? The end reciever of ‘scientific lies’? I want to protest, but it all backfires and leads to Another label…
I really, really set my hopes to you Philip Hickey, and many of your academic friends.
Please, please please, keep bringing these issues up to people that needs to hear them.
//Ove, the lonely swede.
Philip Hickey writes very good articles, insightful and Always easily understood analogies.
And it’s comforting, to some degree, for me to make my own ‘analogy’.
“I have eaten Paxil for 15 years or more, it has produced some certain behaviours not seen earlier in my Life. GSK invented and produces Paxil. GSK has also informed the World of what behaviours can be associated with taking Paxil. Since GSK knows alot about Paxil, the general consencus is whatever GSK says is true.
My delusion that there is a causal link between Paxil and my behaviour can therefor be used by my psychiatrist to put yet Another diagnose on me, wich would be true, until enough people start to question GSK.
That is not likely to happen.”
I guess I better laugh at my own predicament.
It’s heartbreakingly sad to read all of the comments, and the article itself.
And I’m on the “other end” of the spectra, I have tried taking my own Life. I have been obsessed with the thought of ending it all. Even though I never ‘really wanted too’.
All I can share to this conversation is that when a person, like me or others, have SSRI-type medication in our system, out goes the reasoning within ourselves. Suicide becomes an option. And I could almost never see any drawbacks with it when I was the most obsessed over it. Despite I know very well what the family would go through had I died.
So to all of you who have lost a near one to suicide, please make your voices Heard, because there is something strange with these pills.
It takes one to know one they say, I recognise Everything you mention.
But I have also seen my sexual fantasies and preferences changed.
I was also a Young man with a very healthy approach to sex and my girlfriends, they would sure vouch for me being very “curious and affectionate”, doubtful I was very “effective” but I sure as H*** tried.
Now, on Paxil/Seroxat, I couldn’t care less if my partner appreciates my efforts, as long as I get off……
I thought so too, that a cornerstone in any science was an open mind. To let the data tell the tale. But you must surely agree that is not the case concerning SSRI’s?
The scientific trials themselves has been done with the sole purpose of supporting the manufacturers “pre-existing belief/theory”.
No I said in my first line of my comment that I share your beliefs in that old and flawed science isn’t the way forward.
BUT. Newer science isn’t being produced, wich leads us to have to debunk the old ones.
To me it sounds like you want ‘us’, those who have seen the negative effects of SSRI, to behave civil and to according to each letter of the law. While the producers, Big Pharma, should get away with repeted science fraud? And if suicide was a suspected side-effects of SSRI’s back in 1988-1992, doesn’t it make you feel somewhat ‘strange’ to discuss its existing or not now in 2015? Perhaps you can appreciate the “job done” by others who have shared their “doubts” throughout 25 years, allowing us to be at ‘Square 1’ and still argue wether SSRI causes suicide or not. Yes, your doubt helps us look forward to Another quarter Century with this discussion.
It’s not a rash we are talking about, we are talking about several hundred thousands Deaths of humans.
I can agree to that re-evaluating flawed data is not the way forward if we had a choice.
But can you be so kind to tell me how we should produce un-biased data?
Who should sponsor such trial?
Even if your standpoint might be, “better not debunk their lies with their lies”, what other options are there?
So this flawed science has been available since 2007, many real doctors in the real World has been able to Point to this and say the drugs are safe.
Surely you cannot just disregard from what is the outcome of flawed science?
I have no idea of what to make of you mr. Smith, if you are a champion for the absolute flawless science of Utopia, or just spreading intellectual ‘doubt’ to prevent the truth?
Robert Whitaker, I appreciate you highlighting Swedens somewhat fanatic relationship to Serotonin and/or different unproven chemical imbalance theories.
Furthermore you are much welcome this autumn to really make your voice Heard in our Swedish media as you attend ‘Driving us crazy’- festival.
The established beliefs here are almost impossible to change, even for you and your friends in the academic World. It’s like a slow moving lump of mud, that just swallows any critics in its path.
And way out in the wasteland are people like me, the end user of SSRI’s that have suffered ‘great distress’, for decades, but helplessly ignored. Just because our academic society ignores the fraud and lies that have created the SSRI-beast, any help is not on the horizon.
That is a topic that needs to be discussed.
Hightened risks or not, SSRI-antidepressants has left a trail of many “uncharacteristicly violent” men and women. If we accept that, then we must also be prepared to write a warning about it on the panflet and labels.
Personally I’d prefer it if we left SSRI’s.
I’d even say any “risk/benefit”-ratio is nonessential – homicide kind of cancels any and all benefit, wouldn’t you say?
Steve McCrea shows great empathy when he acknowledges that many “killers” probably would NOT want to have a homicidic reaction to their medicines. No matter what kind of elevated risk he was facing.
This is a piece of important science. Little by Little there will emerge more and more evidence that these pills cause horrendeous side effects. Almost 30 years after their intruduction. Perhaps you other readers can estimate how many millions of people who have been affected by this, many whom were never listened to, and Went on to commit suicide?
Is the shear number of sufferers/victims a problem in itself? Is this ‘scam’ “too big to fail”?
These drugs have caused violence and criminal behaviour, are societies prepared to acknowledge that and thereby excusing the ‘involuntary criminal’?
These drugs have fiddled with peoples ability to love and hold Close, are societies prepared to acknowledge that they have consented to distribute medicines that cause divorce, spousal abuse and domestic violence?
These drugs have altered peoples behaviour, making people become impulsive and develop compulsive behaviours, is there really anyone who Thinks any society will acknowledge that these drugs have made people spend their Money on gambling and shoppingsprees?
The list is just too long, humans tend to go for the easy way out: blame the individual and the ever present ‘underlying mental diagnose’.
No schoolshooting or crashed airplane has stopped this madness, I don’t Think any malpractice lawsuit will either.
We are too heavily invested in these drugs to turn back now, it doesn’t matter that none of us agreed on investing based on flawed science and marketing schemes.
Those who are left untouched and have escaped this mess with their lives unscaved are the ones who will be prosperous, the rest of us will be victims until we go 6 feet under.
It’s just too big to fail.
If you do a certain number of scientific research and leave the data alone for 20 years. Then go back and re-evaluate the data, but adjust the questions or the ‘angle’ of the questions. The answers you will find 20 years later will be different.
Adjusting the questions to fit your desired answer cannot be called ‘science’?
I wrote to this professor, since he is also Swedish, but I doubt he will answer.
I’m so ashamed. How come my Little country could be so involved in this 30-year-scam?
It must be some kind of “kid-sibling-complex”, small country wanna do big impact.
Or if you read the bottom of full text:
quote “[B]We thank H Lundbeck, GSK and Pfizer for kindly providing us with patient data from the included trials.[/B]”
And most pilots are more closely monitored than the rest of us. Clearly this guy did not set of any REAL alarms about how he conducted himself. He got praised as a good pilot, had a longtime girlfriend, did Marathons, had a lover. If a person is to hide his persona for that long and without tripping any alarms, I would consider him fully normal.
To debate his state of mind can go on forever, we can’t ask him anymore, we can only draw conclusions from diagnoses and journals. But the question to wether he had SSRI or other Chemicals in his blood, can be answered. And I Think they have recovered what they Believe is his body.
Please dr. Wallace, take one of the famous (infamous) ferries to Sweden and share some of your knowledge to our psychiatrists too.
The denial of ssri hypocrazy is possibly even worse here, not one known critic.
Why not team up with Goetsche and spread some critical knowledge here.
I know I desperately need it, my 15 years of Seroxat is not a pretty fairytale.
Agree, it should be just like that.
And since I have no higher education, but still comprehend the value of the points you’ve laid out, surely academics must be able to too?
I know nothing about statistics, but I’ve Always said you can hide anything with it.
When I first took notice of how my own medicine had been frauded through the system of safeguards, I was chocked. Because as an “average Citizen” I only assumed that the trial periods of my medication was almost fail safe. And that the next step, individual user adverse event report system, made the overall knowledge more and more extensive.
But right now, none of the systems are working. Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT’s) are, as you say, tampered with. (Hiding of data, false positive interpretation of data, lack of full disclosure of data for peer-review, selection of data to publish and so on..)
Adverse event reporting systems are on most cases run by, or governed by former Big Pharma employees. An overwhelming acceptance that reports are “anecdotal”, no matter how re-accuring or how statisticly significant they are, they are “still anecdotal”.
Sweden has an even worse example of adverse event reporting system: “the national board of Health” has shifted the responsibility of administer adverse event reports back to the Pharmaceutical companies themselves!!! (Where they ofcourse gets lost in some file cabinet and regarded as a Company secret, because in Sweden it’s almost impossible for a patient to sue the Company.)
So, once again as you say, where scientists have but a few simple rules to follow to produce good science. They fail at the very basic requirements.
Nothing but full disclosure of raw data, every attempted research must be filed and accessable.
Scientists must be able to withstand scrutiny and even face possible prosecution if recurring malicious
behaviur is detected. Any scientist (or other human for that matter) are perfectly allowed to have a personal opinion, and so speak it, BUT, their science MUST be unbiased in shape and form. Any Company sponsored research should be considered as “anecdotal” until sufficient number of unbiased reports have concluded the findings. (…”oh but no Money exists if it weren’t for the companies paying the bill”….So be it, we want unbiased science or no science at all, when it comes to medicines we are supposed to be able to give our own mother!)
Sorry, got a Little carried away there, but what a nice original post by mr. Randy Paterson
They use “anti-psychiatry” to affiliate reasonable and sound thinking people with scientology and others.
Any opinion that conflicts them, the DSM and/or Big Pharma, must prove its Point beyond unbelievable reason until it might get accepted.
Even then it’s hard to get all of psychiatry on a new page, those with hardcore beliefs will still stand their ground.
Like the scientists P. Hickey mentioned are still fighting to prove SSRI has no link to suicidality.
Like the GP’s that still use the “chemical imbalance”-theory as grounds for medication.
(Saw one in a small Towns newspaper just today, referring to a Swedish online mental Health safety guide)
Like all the psychiatrists medicating their patients with Chemicals that have dubious science behind them, to say the least.
From what I can understand, it’s gonna take alot more than “anti-psychiatry” to change the minds of so many…..
Not a day to be proud of being Swedish, the once so well functioning society with high ethics and morals. According to many Americans we are ‘borderline’ socialists, with government Control from contraseptives subsidized to Young women and alcohol is only sold in government operated stores. But things have changed. Our Pharmacies, once under government operation only, is now privately operated.
The social board of Health and Welfare, “Socialstyrelsen”, makes it’s decisions on advice from such “experts” as Göran Isacsson and Anne-Liis von Knorring (von Knorring, Citalopram and forest labs, 300-million dollar fine).
All this hurts a bit extra, when I was so Close to ending my Life in late 2002, running my car while on Paxil and alcohol. I narrowly escaped, my car did not. If successful I guess they wouldn’t have considered my Death anyway, since I had alcohol in my blood. Little would they have known I was prescribed “Paxil, because it can be combined with alcohol, unlike the older generation of antidepressants, SNRI”
Sweden wants to be a successful society, so we look up to america and their promise to bring hope and prosperity for all. Unfortunately it also brought the commercialism to Pharmaceuticals, a line of Products that are best kept under strict government Control…. Even if it makes you call me “a socialist”