Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Whom can we trust?

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Hi, let me pipe in on the anti-depressants. I earned a degree in psychology and

reviewed a lot of those studies. If you are interested in the subject you need

to read what a guy called " Kirsch " published. He used statistics and reevaluated

the original data collected for the official study that let to FDA approval for

SSRIs, and guess what? He found that those statistics were flawed ( I am trying

to avoid the term manipulated) and when Kirsch recalculated the difference

between REAL medication and placebo, it was very small. And guess what else?

When he tried to publish his research he could not get any mainstream journals

to accept his articles!

According to Kirsch, the placebo effect for depression is strong, stronger than

for other medications, what seems to explain why clients are usually absolutely

sure that their medications are " working. "

One other note: the European are using a new anti-depression drug, tianeptine,

and it REDUCES serotonin, it's called a SSRE (Selective Serotonin Reputake

Enhancer) and it works statistically exactly as well as Prozac. An American

company bought the rights to market it in the US, but they are not interested, I

bet they are waiting until the patents for the SSRIs are expired.

 

Regards,

Angela Pfaffenberger, Ph.D.

 

angelapfa

 

www.InnerhealthSalem.com

 

Phone: 503 364 3022

-

alon marcus

Chinese Medicine

Tuesday, May 12, 2009 8:31 AM

Re: Vaccination - Whom can we trust?

 

 

 

 

 

" In all of my research, I've continually found the same answer.

A similar argument can be drawn with - /at least/ certain -

pharmaceuticals. Depression medications are still prescribed even

though studies show they work only as good as a placebo. Cholesterol

lowering drugs are still prescribed even though they continually show

to not lower cholesterol. "

 

Josh these statement show that you like to ignore evidence and choose

only those that support your views. The VAST majority of studies on

antidepressants show that they do work... as are studies on

cholesterol drugs. You may argue that lowering cholesterol is not

smart or that death rates dont change but not lowering cholesterol

that is ignorant.

 

 

400 29th St. Suite 419

Oakland Ca 94609

 

alonmarcus

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

I find the " reworked " studies interesting. For some reason people seem to more

easily believe these " reworked " statistics above the hundreds of other

scientists that wrote the original studies. While i do think studies done by

drug companies can be and probably often are biased, there are many other

studies on antidepressants and other drugs done by independent centers, and

often multicenter studies which make it a little harder to play with the

numbers, or even studies on the older TCAs that were done way before the strong

influence of drug companies on research that were positive. I have been working

in integrative centers for 25 years and seen hundreds of patients benefit

strongly from antidepressants, to believe these " reworked " stuff. While i also

know we can often offer other choices for many patients, to say antidepressants

do not work i think is a big stretch. I have also seen patients were

alternatives did not work and of course i have seen patients doing much better

with alternatives than with the pharmaceuticals.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Are we aware that the FBI (I think it was them) that has found that in the mass

killings by children, anti-depressants appear to have been involved by the

perpetrators. This news has not been really investigated because the perps were

minors and the drug companies do not want any bad press. Side-effects do list

the same issues as the condition. Kind of makes you wonder.

 

Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

Chinese Medicine

alonmarcus

Wed, 13 May 2009 10:24:35 -0700

Re:Whom can we trust?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I find the " reworked " studies interesting. For some reason people seem to

more easily believe these " reworked " statistics above the hundreds of other

scientists that wrote the original studies. While i do think studies done by

drug companies can be and probably often are biased, there are many other

studies on antidepressants and other drugs done by independent centers, and

often multicenter studies which make it a little harder to play with the

numbers, or even studies on the older TCAs that were done way before the strong

influence of drug companies on research that were positive. I have been working

in integrative centers for 25 years and seen hundreds of patients benefit

strongly from antidepressants, to believe these " reworked " stuff. While i also

know we can often offer other choices for many patients, to say antidepressants

do not work i think is a big stretch. I have also seen patients were

alternatives did not work and of course i have seen patients doing much better

with alternatives than with the pharmaceuticals.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi Angela,

 

I would be very interested in reading what has been published by Kirsch; could

you link me?

 

I am curious if this is related to the recent study published in the American

Journal of Psychiatry that mentioned the problems with the phase III trials

(http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/appi.ajp.2008.08071027v1)

 

Thanks,

- Josh Barton, C.M.T., H.H.C.

 

>Chinese Medicine , " Angela >Pfaffenberger,

PH.D. " <angelapfa wrote:

>

> Hi, let me pipe in on the anti-depressants. I earned a degree in psychology

and reviewed a lot of those studies. If you are interested in the subject you

need to read what a guy called " Kirsch " published. He used statistics and

reevaluated the original data collected for the official study that let to FDA

approval for SSRIs, and guess what? He found that those statistics were flawed (

I am trying to avoid the term manipulated) and when Kirsch recalculated the

difference between REAL medication and placebo, it was very small. And guess

what else? When he tried to publish his research he could not get any mainstream

journals to accept his articles!

> According to Kirsch, the placebo effect for depression is strong, stronger

than for other medications, what seems to explain why clients are usually

absolutely sure that their medications are " working. "

> One other note: the European are using a new anti-depression drug, tianeptine,

and it REDUCES serotonin, it's called a SSRE (Selective Serotonin Reputake

Enhancer) and it works statistically exactly as well as Prozac. An American

company bought the rights to market it in the US, but they are not interested, I

bet they are waiting until the patents for the SSRIs are expired.

>

> Regards,

> Angela Pfaffenberger, Ph.D.

>

> angelapfa

>

> www.InnerhealthSalem.com

>

> Phone: 503 364 3022

> -

> alon marcus

> Chinese Medicine

> Tuesday, May 12, 2009 8:31 AM

> Re: Vaccination - Whom can we trust?

>

>

>

>

>

> " In all of my research, I've continually found the same answer.

> A similar argument can be drawn with - /at least/ certain -

> pharmaceuticals. Depression medications are still prescribed even

> though studies show they work only as good as a placebo. Cholesterol

> lowering drugs are still prescribed even though they continually show

> to not lower cholesterol. "

>

> Josh these statement show that you like to ignore evidence and choose

> only those that support your views. The VAST majority of studies on

> antidepressants show that they do work... as are studies on

> cholesterol drugs. You may argue that lowering cholesterol is not

> smart or that death rates dont change but not lowering cholesterol

> that is ignorant.

>

>

>

> 400 29th St. Suite 419

> Oakland Ca 94609

>

>

>

> alonmarcus

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Are we aware that the FBI (I think it was them) that has found that in

the mass killings by children, anti-depressants appear to have been

involved by the perpetrators. This news has not been really

investigated because the perps were minors and the drug companies do

not want any bad press. Side-effects do list the same issues as the

condition. Kind of makes you wonder.

>>>>mike do your research this idea as been disputed

 

 

 

400 29th St. Suite 419

Oakland Ca 94609

 

 

 

alonmarcus

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

You raise a good point, Mike.

 

Dr. Gary Null did a documentary film that focused a lot on this called The

Drugging of Our Children

(http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3609599239524875493). What I find

interesting is the in-depth look it takes into some of the individuals that did

this. From what I remember of the film, some of these kids talk about being in a

dream-like state when these events took place.

 

To the best of my knowledge, every school-shooter (at least that's hit the

media) (save for one of the kids involved in the Columbine incident) was on

SSRI's at the time (I am not aware of the individual reasons why they were on

them, however). Given, many lay the blame on the fact that they were (or seemed

to be) depressed and that's why they were on the drugs, but considering the

information disclosed in Null's film, I think this should be investigated.

 

I googled " SSRI school shooting " and I found something interesting:

 

An article from the Guardian from 1999 says (speaking about a family's court

case against Eli Lilly for Prozac)

 

" Internal documents belonging to Lilly were produced in court. And although

Lilly won the case - the jury decided it could not hold it responsible for Bill

Forsyth Sr's death - it may have lost the argument, for those documents showed

that Lilly knew as long as 20 years ago that Prozac can produce in some people a

strange, agitated state of mind that can trigger in them an unstoppable urge to

commit suicide or murder. "

 

(http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/1999/oct/30/weekend7.weekend1)

 

 

- Josh Barton, C.M.T., H.H.C.

 

 

Chinese Medicine , mike Bowser

<naturaldoc1 wrote:

>

>

> Are we aware that the FBI (I think it was them) that has found that in the

mass killings by children, anti-depressants appear to have been involved by the

perpetrators. This news has not been really investigated because the perps were

minors and the drug companies do not want any bad press. Side-effects do list

the same issues as the condition. Kind of makes you wonder.

>

> Michael W. Bowser, DC, LAc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Alon,

 

Kirsch's study was based on the data that the drug companies submitted to the

FDA. After submitting their data to the FDA, they naturally then decided to

publish the data in a medical journal; it was there that the numbers were

skewered.

 

A separate study published in the NEJM last year ( " Selective Publication of

Antidepressant Trials and Its Influence on Apparent Efficacy " ) came to the same

conclusions: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/358/3/252

 

John McManamy ( " an award-winning mental health journalist " ) puts much of this

into perspective here: http://www.mcmanweb.com/clinical_trials.html

 

It's not that these anti-depressants don't work. They work, but largely as a

placebo. That's what the data is showing us.

 

-- Josh Barton, C.M.T., H.H.C.

 

Chinese Medicine , " Alon Marcus "

<alonmarcus wrote:

>

> I find the " reworked " studies interesting. For some reason people seem to more

easily believe these " reworked " statistics above the hundreds of other

scientists that wrote the original studies. While i do think studies done by

drug companies can be and probably often are biased, there are many other

studies on antidepressants and other drugs done by independent centers, and

often multicenter studies which make it a little harder to play with the

numbers, or even studies on the older TCAs that were done way before the strong

influence of drug companies on research that were positive. I have been working

in integrative centers for 25 years and seen hundreds of patients benefit

strongly from antidepressants, to believe these " reworked " stuff. While i also

know we can often offer other choices for many patients, to say antidepressants

do not work i think is a big stretch. I have also seen patients were

alternatives did not work and of course i have seen patients doing much better

with alternatives than with the pharmaceuticals.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Angela

Kirsch work is published. He brings some interesting questions but no

answers yet. To me the most compelling evidence are the longer term

studies were placebo effects tend to fall off. From the studies i

reviewed, and its been a while since i looked at SSRIs, it looked like

the longer the study the the bigger the effect difference. Anyone

that works with me know that i alway poopo results patients report for

the first few weeks to months (except for objective physical

findings), i call it the honeymoon period were, it is very hard to

have patients NOT report they are feeling better. As far as Tianeptine

we do not know what the post synaptic actions is. Perhaps that is the

mechanism of action. It sounds like it has some stimulant like effects

 

 

 

400 29th St. Suite 419

Oakland Ca 94609

 

 

 

alonmarcus

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Josh

Not publishing negative studies is a huge problem and as far as i know

the new rules prohibit it. I think all registered studies have to be

published and i think it is because of the study you quoted.

 

 

 

 

400 29th St. Suite 419

Oakland Ca 94609

 

 

 

alonmarcus

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Alon,

 

Thank you for the input, I was not aware of that. If you happen to have more

information on that, could you link me to something?

 

I am curious as to how the results from the study (http://tinyurl.com/d8m6tp)

published in last month's American Journal of Psychiatry will play out..

 

-- Josh Barton , C.M.T., H.H.C.

 

Chinese Medicine , alon marcus

<alonmarcus wrote:

>

> Josh

> Not publishing negative studies is a huge problem and as far as i know

> the new rules prohibit it. I think all registered studies have to be

> published and i think it is because of the study you quoted.

>

>

>

>

> 400 29th St. Suite 419

> Oakland Ca 94609

>

>

>

> alonmarcus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...