Your Drug May Be Your Problem

[Guest guest]

http://www.antipsychiatry.org/br-ydmby.htm

 

Book Review

 

Your Drug May Be Your Problem:

How and Why to Stop Taking Psychiatric Drugs

by

Peter R. Breggin, M.D. & David Cohen, Ph.D.

Perseus Books - Reading, Massachusetts - 1999

 

reviewed by Douglas A. Smith

If you need specific advice about how to stop taking one or more

psychiatric drugs, this is the book to read. In this respect, this book fills

in a gap left in other books by Dr. Peter Breggin I have read, including

Psychiatric Drugs: Hazards to the Brain (1983), Toxic Psychiatry (1991), and

Talking Back to Prozac (1998). In this book Drs. Breggin & Cohen also make

clear they think the concept of " mental illness " is erroneous. For example,

they repeatedly put the term mental illness in mocking quotation marks. They

state clearly that in their opinion you are better off without psychiatric

drugs, whatever your " psychiatric problem " may be: depression, manic-depressive

mood swings, anxiety attacks, " schizophrenia " or psychosis, or anything else.

In this book Drs. Breggin & Cohen review the reasons you should not be

taking any kind of psychiatric drug:

" No psychiatric drug has ever been tailored to a known biochemical

derangement. ... no biochemical imbalances have ever been documented with

certainty in association with any psychiatric diagnosis. The hunt goes on for

these illusive imbalances; but their existence is pure speculation, inspired by

those who advocate drugs " (p. 35).

" Although medication advocates often speak with seeming confidence about how

psychiatric drugs can correct biochemical imbalances in the brain, they are

merely indulging in pure speculation. There's little evidence for the existence

of any such imbalances and no way to demonstrate how drugs would affect them if

they did exist " (p. 34).

" Often, patients are told, 'It's biological and genetic.' Never mind that

there's no substantial evidence that any psychiatric diagnoses have a physical

basis " (p. 93).

 

" Precisely because there is so little scientific backing for the use of

psychiatric drugs, mystification and slogans are often communicated to doctors

by drug advertising, and then to patients by doctors " (p. 112-123, underline

added).

" Indeed, we should suspect that any psychoactive drug - any drug that affects

mental function - tends to produce irreversible changes in some if not most

people. What hope can we have that bathing the brain in a psychiatric drug will

actually improve the overall function of this mysterious organ? Almost none.

In fact ... most of what we know about the various neurotransmitters has been

gathered by studying how psychiatric drugs disrupt or spoil their functioning "

(p. 9 - underline added).

" Advocates of psychiatric drugs often claim that the medications improve

learning and the ability to benefit from psychotherapy, but the contrary is

true. There are no drugs that improve mental function, self-understanding, or

human relations. Any drug that affects mental processes does so by impairing

them " (p. 97-98).

" Despite a hugely successful promotional campaign by drug companies and

biological psychiatry, the effectiveness of most or all psychiatric drugs

remains difficult to demonstrate. The drugs often prove no more effective than

sugar pills, or placebos - and to accomplish even these limited positive

results, the clinical trials and data that they generate typically have to be

statistically manipulated " (p. 37).

" But isn't psychiatry science? Isn't faith in psychiatry based on facts? On

research? Can't we 'trust in research'? The sad truth is that, in the field of

psychiatry, it is impossible to 'trust in research.' Nearly all of the research

in this field is paid for by drug companies and conducted by people who will

'deliver' in the best way possible for those companies. ... Sadly, even

well-informed people too often put their faith in psychiatry and psychiatric

research. It is the same as putting their faith in a drug company " (p.

189-190).

" ...emotional suffering cannot be dulled without harming other functions such

as concentration, alertness, sensitivity, and self-awareness " (p. 36).

" All psychiatric drugs can cause problems during withdrawal " (p. 16). And

the longer you take a psychiatric drug, the more difficult your withdrawal will

be.

" ...many adverse drug effects are difficult to distinguish from emotional

problems " (p. 24).

" Contrary to claims, neuroleptics have no specific effects on irrational

ideas (delusions) or perceptions (hallucinations). Like all other psychiatric

drugs, they have the same impact on healthy animals, healthy volunteers, and

patients - namely, the production of apathy and indifference " (p. 77).

Neuroleptic drugs cause brain damage evidenced by a movement disorder called

tardive dyskinesia, but " Neuroleptics actually suppress the symptoms of tardive

dyskinesia while the disease is developing. ... The rates of TD [tardive

dyskinesia] are extremely high. Many standard textbooks estimate a rate of 5% -

7% per year in healthy young adults [who are taking neuroleptic drugs]. The

rate is cumulative so that 25% - 35% of patients [taking neuroleptics] will

develop the disorder in 5 years of treatment. Among the elderly [taking

neuroleptics], rates of TD reach 20% or more per year. For a variety of

reasons, including the failure to include tardive akathisia in estimates, the

actual rates are probably much higher for all patients " (p. 78).

So-called antipsychotic or neuroleptic drugs cause a fatal disease called

neuroleptic malignant syndrome in up to 2.4% of people taking them. " Using a

low-end rate of 1 percent, Maxmen and Ward (1995, p. 33) estimate that 1,000 -

4,000 deaths occur in America each year as a result of neuroleptic malignant

syndrome. The actual number is probably much greater " (p. 79).

Neuroleptic, also known as antipsychotic or major tranquilizer drugs " subject

almost every system in the body to impairment. Research, including a recent

study, indicates that these drugs are toxic to cells in general " (p. 81).

Clozaril ... was banned in some European countries because it caused so many

fatalities; but the escalating power of drug companies subsequently led to its

approval by the FDA " in the United States (p. 82).

If you are pregnant, psychiatric drugs you take will cross into the baby's

bloodstream " and from there, to enter the unborn infant's brain. Similarly,

psychiatric drugs enter the mother's milk and thus also affects the nursing

infant's brain " (p. 26).

" ...women who take lithium during pregnancy expose their infants to an

increased rate of heart defects " (p. 26).

" Some physicians try to reassure pregnant or nursing mothers about their

baby's safety while they are taking psychiatric drugs. But there is no

scientific basis for offering this reassurance in regard to any drug that

affects the brain " (p. 84).

 

This book is a well-documented, well-written, recent (1999), exposé of the

health care quackery called biological psychiatry, particularly psychiatric

drugs.

On specifically how to go about stopping taking psychiatric drugs, Drs.

Breggin & Cohen say " The general rule recommended by some practitioners is to

taper off in 10 percent decrements - usually every seven to ten days " (p. 126).

That means you do it in ten separate steps. They suggest the last ten percent

may need to be divided into a series of smaller steps and that if you are an

older person who has " been taking tranquilizers daily for over twenty years ...

a withdrawal period of two years is not unusual " (p. 137). If you are taking

more than one psychiatric drug each day, they recommend going off the drugs one

at a time, that is, continuing your usual dose of your other drugs while you

taper off one of them. How do you decide which drug to discontinue first? They

say if " you're taking drug 'A' to counteract the side effects of drug 'B' ...

you should probably start withdrawal with drug 'B' " (p. 136). While they

recommend you withdraw from psychiatric drugs with the help of a health care

professional, they acknowledge that " most people who come off psychiatric drugs

have successfully done so on their own, without active clinical supervision " (p.

113 - italics in original).

I was disappointed to find nothing in this book about a problem that is

central to the subject of the book: forced psychiatric drugging of imprisoned or

" hospitalized " persons, and the enactment of forced outpatient psychiatric

drugging laws in the majority of the states of the U.S.A., exemplified by

Kendra's Law in New York. Like many of us in the ex-patient's or " psychiatric

survivor's " movement, I was once imprisoned or " hospitalized " and forced to take

a psychiatric drug - Thorazine. I was psychologically entirely normal at the

time, even if I was very unhappy about the loss of the relationship with the

woman I loved and about being on scholastic probation in college, leading to my

parents deciding to force me into what they mistakenly thought would be

" therapy " : Since I refused to seek " therapy " voluntarily, their only way to

force me into " therapy " was committing me to a " hospital " against my will. The

day I was incarcerated (or " hospitalized " ), after the hospital staff got through

asking me questions for their paperwork, I was permitted to walk around awhile

in the hallways and rooms in the place I'd been imprisoned, exploring my new

surroundings. But for no apparent reason, after awhile a nurse approached me

with a hypodermic needle in her hand and told me she had a shot for me my doctor

had prescribed for me. " I haven't even seen a doctor " I told her. She seemed

to realize I was correct, and she looked a little embarrassed when I asked the

name of the doctor who had supposedly ordered the shot: She had no idea who he

was. But none of that mattered to the hospital staff. She went away but was

back a little while later with a large orderly, later joined by another, to

force me to submit to the injection. They also did not care when I told them I

hadn't yet had a hearing or trial to determine if my commitment was justified or

not, that I was being held only on a pretrial commitment order, and that it was

wrong for them to force me to take a drug before I'd had a chance to go to court

to present my arguments against committing or " treating " me against my will.

Because of involuntary " hospitalization " laws in every state, and " outpatient

commitment " laws in 40 or more states of the U.S.A. that exist for the purpose

of forcing people to take psychiatric drugs or face repeated imprisonment in

psychiatric " hospitals, " those of us who because of our past experience of it

fear forced administration of these harmful drugs need advice about how to

protect ourselves from it. All Drs. Breggin & Cohen say on this subject is: " Do

not let anyone pressure you into starting or continuing psychiatric drugs. As a

competent adult, you have the ethical and legal right to make your own decisions

about taking psychiatric drugs. ... Your decisions about taking or rejecting

drugs need to be made without coercive pressure from doctors " (p. 29). While I

agree with this statement, it is obvious many, apparently most, state

legislators, judges, psychiatrists, and psychiatric hospital staff members do

not. What us victims of psychiatry need is a strategy for avoiding forced

psychiatric drugging. Drs. Breggin & Cohen do not offer one in this book.

There may not be a reliable way to protect yourself from forced

psychiatric drugging, but here are two ideas: One is to hire a lawyer to write a

" Declaration Regarding Mental Health Treatment, " also known as an " advance

directive, " in which you say you want to receive no psychiatric drugs (or

physical restraint or shock treatment) if you ever are declared mentally ill or

incompetent, with a certification by a psychiatrist attached stating that you

were mentally competent at the time you made the Declaration. This will

undermine the argument that you would consent to " treatment " if only your

thinking were not clouded by mental illness. Another strategy is to maintain a

relationship with a psychiatrist who opposes coercive " treatment " who will

testify for you if you become a victim of psychiatric oppression such as forced

" hospitalization " or psychiatric assault such as forced psychiatric drugging. A

lawyer recently advised me it probably needs to be a psychiatrist, not a

psychologist. Perhaps in states where psychologists are permitted to commit

people against their will, a psychologist's testimony would be adequate.

In a rational world where human rights were respected, forced psychiatric

drugging would not happen. In a rational world where human rights were

respected, none of today's psychiatric drugs would be used by anyone,

voluntarily or involuntarily. Perhaps books like Your Drug May Be Your Problem

will help some of us start thinking rationally about psychiatric drugs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gettingwell- / Vitamins, Herbs, Aminos, etc.

 

To , e-mail to: Gettingwell-

Or, go to our group site: Gettingwell

 

 

 

 

Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now