Bush on Prozac?

[Guest guest]

This was written *before* the stock market crash, but it takes little

imagination to believe that many politicians, just like stockbrokers, have

altered their brain chemistry with antidepressants. I think we as a people

have a right to know if our selected President is taking a mood-altering

pharmaceutical that may be careening us toward his personal apocalypse.

 

Is Prozac Driving Wall Street?

by Robert Wright

 

 

" Is it possible that the general economic expansion in the US since '93 or

so is directly related to the growing use of anti-depressants? Consider the

symptoms of depression: lack of energy, motivation, general apathy etc. Then

consider the demographics of a large percentage of anti-depressant users:

professional, intelligent, in general much more competent than they believe

themselves to be while suffering from depression. What would be the effect

of removing said symptoms from such a population? Greatly increased

productivity and entrepreneurism. An artificially inflated stock market

would of course be an unfortunate side-effect. " --Lauren Lundblad

 

Back in college, I once heard a guy fantasize about somehow getting cocaine

into Wall Street's water supply and making a fortune by betting on the bull

market this would trigger. Or, for that matter, he could bet on the bear

market that would ensue a couple of hours later.

 

In psychopharmacology, after all, what goes up must come down. At least,

that was the thinking back then, before Prozac. With Prozac, you supposedly

can defy the law of gravity: get the bull moods without the bear moods‹and,

presumably, get a bull market without an immediately ensuing bear market.

Don't laugh. One noted psychiatrist is now speculating that maybe Prozac and

other antidepressants are being gobbled in such volume as to account for the

stock market's seemingly unshakeable self-esteem. Randolph Nesse, author

(with George Williams) of Why We Get Sick: The New Science of Darwinian

Medicine, estimates that about 20 million Americans are on antidepressants.

And at least some people who take these drugs " become far less cautious than

they were before, worrying too little about real dangers. This is exactly

the mind-set of many current investors. " If indeed " investor caution is

being inhibited by psychotropic drugs, " a Wall Street bubble " could grow

larger than usual " before popping " with potentially catastrophic economic

and political consequences. " Nesse's theory was mass-e-mailed to journalists

(e.g., me) by his agent, John Brockman.

 

Brockman asked his clients to opine on the subject of " today's most

important underreported story, " then sent their opinions far and wide. The

idea, of course, is to turn these underreported stories into overreported

stories, thus turning his underpublicized clients into overpublicized

clients.

 

In this case, Brockman's plan may work. Nesse, a professor at the University

of Michigan, is a personable, articulate (and smart, if it matters) guy who

comes off well on video. Coupled with his Wall-Street-on-Prozac theory, he

now becomes a wildly proliferating sound bite just waiting to happen. I give

him a 50-50 shot at being on CNBC within a week--maybe even one of the

networks. After all, there is an issue here that goes beyond Wall Street.

What happens when the serotonin-specific antidepressants render some users

nearly numb to caution, impervious to negative feedback, in various realms

of life? Do they get uppity with bosses and get fired? Do they quit jobs,

certain that they can succeed in any endeavor of their choosing? Do they

become babbling, obnoxious bores? Take it away, Dr. Nesse.

 

Is the Market on Prozac?

by Randolph M. Nesse, M.D.

 

 

" After devoting the last ten-plus years to researching and writing about

these serotonergic agents, working with those who have had adverse reactions

to the drugs, and testifying as an expert witness in criminal cases

involving these drugs, I can state without hesitation that I have seen

similar reactions in patients on these antidepressants for years. I have

even mentioned that these drugs really keep the economy moving -

unfortunately the overspending keeps the bankruptcy courts busy as well.

(Note how bankruptcy has sky-rocketed since the introduction of these

drugs.)It is way past time for the world to wake up the most devastating

drug problem the world has ever seen which is the result of the use of these

so-called antidepressants. The very fiber of our society is almost gone as a

result. They have created many new terms and situations that we have never

witnessed prior to the introduction of SSRI antidepressants--such as:

" Murder-Suicide " , " Suicide by Cop " , " Road Rage " , " False Memory Syndrome " ,

" Workplace Violence " , " School Shootings " , mothers killing their children

(approximately 90% of these mothers are on these drugs), women committing

violent crimes, out of the blue one family member kills their entire family,

etc. And those are only the psychiatric side effects. The physical side

effects are just as destructive: diabetes, heart damage, MS, fybromyalgia,

chronic fatigue syndrome, to list only a few of so many reported to the

FDA. " --Dr. Ann Blake Tracy

 

 

 

The social effects of psychotropic medications is the unreported story of

our time. These effects may be small, but they may be large, with the

potential for social catastrophe or positive transformation. I make no claim

to know which position is correct, but I do know that the question is

important, unstudied, and in need of careful research.

 

The press has been preoccupied with possible explanations for the current

extraordinary boom. Many articles say, as they always do while a bubble

grows, that this market is " different. " Some attribute the difference to new

information technology. Others credit changes in foreign trade, or the baby

boomer's lack of experience with a real economic depression. But you never

see a serious story about the possibility that this market is different

because investor's brains are different. There is good reason to suspect

that they are.

 

Prescriptions for psychoactive drugs have increased from 131 million in 1988

to 233 million in 1998, with nearly 10 million prescriptions filled last

year for Prozac alone. The market for antidepressants in the USA is now $6.3

billion per year. Additional huge numbers of people use herbs to influence

their moods. I cannot find solid data on how many people in the USA take

antidepressants, but a calculation based on sales suggests a rough estimate

of 20 million.

 

What percent of brokers, dealers, and investors are taking antidepressant

drugs? Wealthy, stressed urbanites are especially likely to use them. I

would not be surprised to learn that one in four large investors has used

some kind of mood-altering drug. What effects do these drugs have on

investment behavior? We don't know. A 1998 study by Brian Knutson and

colleagues found that the serotonin specific antidepressant paroxetine

(Paxil) did not cause euphoria in normal people, but did block negative

affects like fear and sadness. From seeing many patients who take such

agents, I know that some experience only improved mood, often a miraculous

and even life-saving change. Others, however, report that they become far

less cautious than they were before, worrying too little about real dangers.

This is exactly the mind-set of many current investors.

 

Human nature has always given rise to booms and bubbles, followed by crashes

and depressions. But if investor caution is being inhibited by psychotropic

drugs, bubbles could grow larger than usual before they pop, with

potentially catastrophic economic and political consequences. If chemicals

are inhibiting normal caution in any substantial fraction of investors, we

need to know about it. A more positive interpretation is also easy to

envision. If 20 million workers are more engaged and effective, to say

nothing of showing up for work more regularly, that is a dramatic tonic for

the economy. There is every reason to think that many workers and their

employers are gaining such benefits. Whether the overall mental health of

the populace is improving remains an open question, however. Overall rates

of depression seem stable or increasing in most technological countries, and

the suicide rate is stubbornly unchanged despite all the new efforts to

recognize and treat depression.

 

The social effects of psychotropic medications is the unreported story of

our time. These effects may be small, but they may be large, with the

potential for social catastrophe or positive transformation. I make no claim

to know which position is correct, but I do know that the question is

important, unstudied, and in need of careful research. What government

agency is responsible for ensuring that such investigations get carried out?

The National Institute of Mental Health? The Securities and Exchange

Commission? Thoughtful investigative reporting can give us preliminary

answers that should help to focus attention on the social effects of

psychotropic medications.

 

Randoph M. Nesse, M.D., is Professor of Psychiatry, Director, ISR Evolution

and Human Adaptation Program, The University of Michigan and coauthor (with

George C. Williams) of Why We Get Sick: The New Science of Darwinian

Medicine.