SSRIs

Question:

I know an arse. Who thinks changing the clock is going to make this crap stick. Count Down Begins. why bother?

Response:

Just one opinion, but I think your conspiracy theory is absurd.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> please correct your date.  You’re top-posting. > — > I know a man who saw God so clearly that he lost all faith. > — Aegidius of Assisi quoted in "The Silent Cry" by Dorothee Soelle > I hope that after I die, people will say of me: ‘That guy sure owed me a > lot > of money.’ > – Jack Handey > Dear Group > Greetings. I am a bipolar disordered individual who is finding this group > absolutely superb. Whereas most groups waste your time with irrelevancies > and indulgences, this group is substance to the max, and bears witness > therefore to the perception that we sufferers of bipolarity and allied > conditions lack nothing in depth. > I was only diagnosed last Nov. after a severe experience where depression > triggered a profound mystical opening (this has been the pattern of my > life). Essentially my perception is that what we ’suffer’ from is foremost > a > spiritual affliction, a kind of inability to adjust our frequencies to > those > of the majority, whose own more conditioned frequencies tend to fall > within > agreeable parameters for the easy management of the soceity > they create and further condition. > I feel very strongly – and you are most welcome to agree, disagree or > otherwise feed back – that the appearance of SSRIs such as Prozac and > other > such ‘upper downers’ (my term, I even wrote a song about it;) > are the establishment response to the challenge of the restlessness of the > middle class white population in the wake of the societal upheavals of the > late 60s and early 70s. Look at it this way (and this is highly > theoretical, > if a little too credible to dismiss): In the late 60s and early 70s the > unrest in the West, esp. in the West, amongst the white middle class – > which > was unprecedented in its style and content – must have been very > concerning > to the control structure. They had already started dealing with some > success > with the problems of > ethnic minority rebellion by running hard, highly addictive drugs into > inner > city areas, etc (this is now a matter of record) thus turning the > rebellious > energy in on itself. But what to do with the more ‘important’ middle class > strata of society, who were also showing signs of discontent and unease? > The control structure realised that different rules had to apply for this > latter group. Hence the arising of a new kind of addictive and, if > anything, > even more insidious kind of drug. A kind of drug that would desensitise, > render more submissive, and crucially undermine spiritual aspects of the > human being (which are causal in the kind of unrest seen as necessary to > suppress) whilst leaving most users able to function as needed for society > at large to continue to endorse and support the control structure. Eureka! > SSRIs! Prozac!! Cipramil!! Zispin!! Miracle drugs (sic) to treat > ‘depression’ which is in any case often just a nautral process of > spiritual > awakening where the initial symptoms of a change of awareness and > consciousness – the coming to awareness first of the negative energy > forms – > that would eventually, if treated intelligently, give way to new growth in > the mind, body and spirit, are instead hammered ruthlessly into clinical > negatives. > Is this mad raving? Conspiracy theory?? I doubt it. As a sufferer for a > quarter century from bipolarity I am not ‘blaming anybody’ and I am > realist. > All I am saying is that it seems a little uncanny that all these Prozac > drugs and their boosters appeared when they did. This is a form of > spiritual > warfare we’re seeing, and it is intensifying. The economic battle is won. > Now the battle for our souls has begun. Literally. Even TV, MTV, video > games, movies, and all the other paraphenalia of distraction has not been > enough to > deter awakening awareness at this time. The ‘drugs’ are the best hope > ‘they’ > have of making ‘us’ them. > Comments welcome…and thanx for a magnificent resource and > support…Cybermystic

Response:

Don’t forget the shadow prez is on prozac.

Response:

please correct your date.  You’re top-posting. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> — > I know a man who saw God so clearly that he lost all faith. > — Aegidius of Assisi quoted in "The Silent Cry" by Dorothee Soelle > I hope that after I die, people will say of me: ‘That guy sure owed me a lot > of money.’ > – Jack Handey > Dear Group > Greetings. I am a bipolar disordered individual who is finding this group > absolutely superb. Whereas most groups waste your time with irrelevancies > and indulgences, this group is substance to the max, and bears witness > therefore to the perception that we sufferers of bipolarity and allied > conditions lack nothing in depth. > I was only diagnosed last Nov. after a severe experience where depression > triggered a profound mystical opening (this has been the pattern of my > life). Essentially my perception is that what we ’suffer’ from is foremost a > spiritual affliction, a kind of inability to adjust our frequencies to those > of the majority, whose own more conditioned frequencies tend to fall within > agreeable parameters for the easy management of the soceity > they create and further condition. > I feel very strongly – and you are most welcome to agree, disagree or > otherwise feed back – that the appearance of SSRIs such as Prozac and other > such ‘upper downers’ (my term, I even wrote a song about it;) > are the establishment response to the challenge of the restlessness of the > middle class white population in the wake of the societal upheavals of the > late 60s and early 70s. Look at it this way (and this is highly theoretical, > if a little too credible to dismiss): In the late 60s and early 70s the > unrest in the West, esp. in the West, amongst the white middle class – which > was unprecedented in its style and content – must have been very concerning > to the control structure. They had already started dealing with some success > with the problems of > ethnic minority rebellion by running hard, highly addictive drugs into inner > city areas, etc (this is now a matter of record) thus turning the rebellious > energy in on itself. But what to do with the more ‘important’ middle class > strata of society, who were also showing signs of discontent and unease? > The control structure realised that different rules had to apply for this > latter group. Hence the arising of a new kind of addictive and, if anything, > even more insidious kind of drug. A kind of drug that would desensitise, > render more submissive, and crucially undermine spiritual aspects of the > human being (which are causal in the kind of unrest seen as necessary to > suppress) whilst leaving most users able to function as needed for society > at large to continue to endorse and support the control structure. Eureka! > SSRIs! Prozac!! Cipramil!! Zispin!! Miracle drugs (sic) to treat > ‘depression’ which is in any case often just a nautral process of spiritual > awakening where the initial symptoms of a change of awareness and > consciousness – the coming to awareness first of the negative energy forms – > that would eventually, if treated intelligently, give way to new growth in > the mind, body and spirit, are instead hammered ruthlessly into clinical > negatives. > Is this mad raving? Conspiracy theory?? I doubt it. As a sufferer for a > quarter century from bipolarity I am not ‘blaming anybody’ and I am realist. > All I am saying is that it seems a little uncanny that all these Prozac > drugs and their boosters appeared when they did. This is a form of spiritual > warfare we’re seeing, and it is intensifying. The economic battle is won. > Now the battle for our souls has begun. Literally. Even TV, MTV, video > games, movies, and all the other paraphenalia of distraction has not been > enough to > deter awakening awareness at this time. The ‘drugs’ are the best hope ‘they’ > have of making ‘us’ them. > Comments welcome…and thanx for a magnificent resource and > support…Cybermystic

Response:

Smell the fart.

Response:

Way past China’s Shore.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Steps" >Smell the fart. > Clear across the Sea?? > — > "Caution, the surgeon general has found that psychiatric > treatements cause poverty and mental illness."

Response:

Question:

August 2, 1996. This date will forever be engraved upon my mind. Prozac is responsible for the rape of my soul. I am struck with horror at the pain, the despair… the physical and mental torture that I experienced. And yet, even these words do not adequately describe the suffering that I endured from the effects of Prozac (fluoxetine).  

Response:

Question:

I have a hypomanic reaction to SSRIs. Is there anything out there that doesn’t lead to hypomania in those of us that are prone toward it? Louise

Response:

> I have a hypomanic reaction to SSRIs. > Is there anything out there that doesn’t lead to hypomania in those of > us that are prone toward it? > Louise

I have the same problem with SSRI and tried Serzone (no hypomanic reaction but made me sleep all the time) and Manerix (moclobemide), a good antidepressant with very little side effects that is not available in the US. alias.p

Response:

> I have a hypomanic reaction to SSRIs. > Is there anything out there that doesn’t lead to hypomania in those of > us that are prone toward it? > Louise

I understand that the new direction of anti-depressants, after patents expire soon such as on prozac, will actually be a backwards direction, towards tricyclics. You might explore those, and also consider that wellburtin (is supposed to) effects dopamine rather than seratonin. I believe wellbutrin is more commonly prescribed to patients who might experience (hypo)mania. You also need to discuss these things with your doctor.

Response:

That’s odd since Wellbutrin is definitely one of the speediest of current ADs, often causing insomnia in fact.

Response:

> That’s odd since Wellbutrin is definitely one of the speediest of current ADs, > often causing insomnia in fact.

What’s even more odd, is that neurontin is used as a mood stabilizer, yet causes almost immediate hypomania. They might use it as an anti depressant now, I’m not sure.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I have a hypomanic reaction to SSRIs. > Is there anything out there that doesn’t lead to hypomania in those of > us that are prone toward it? > Louise > I understand that the new direction of anti-depressants, after patents > expire soon such as on prozac, will actually be a backwards direction, > towards tricyclics. You might explore those, and also consider that > wellburtin (is supposed to) effects dopamine rather than seratonin. I > believe wellbutrin is more commonly prescribed to patients who might > experience (hypo)mania. > You also need to discuss these things with your doctor.

I took Wellbutrin a while ago and was so-o-o-o irritable I couldn’t stand myself! Louise

Response:

Question:

According to Vitriholic <dracodeprofundis<spam, spam, eggs, bacon and spam>: > Welcome to paradise: www.bltc.com

I think that site has some inaccuracies, but it’s infinitely better informed than certain Luddite mentalities regarding the subject. Chris.

Response:

Welcome to paradise: www.bltc.com Vitriholic

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Wow, really? You’ve spoiled it for me now: all that research, and it means > nothing? None of it’s true? Oh well, let’s just hold hands and put our faith > in the lord. > Although…now that I think about it, I’d rather take my chances with > medicine. > Vitriholic > www.btlc.com > -> > ->Not to be confused with an NARI, but it depends on this week’s > ->current official abbreviations, I think.  :)  Seriously, though, > ->it has about equal potency for serotonin and noradrenaline, in > ->theory a bit like a tricyclic without the unwanted gubbins like > ->antihistamine and anticholinergic effects; IME it seems to do > ->something else, maybe direct 5HT2C stimulation a la fluoxetine > ->as it seems to have the potential to be an anxiogenic. > The kind of "thinking" that goes on in these biopsychiatry posts is so > overloaded with ignorance of neurochemistry, fallacies about what > conclusions follow from what premises, groundless assertions, > breathtaking leaps of illogic, wishful thinking, appeals to authority, > and just flat-out horseshit that it’s hard to know where to even begin > dismantling them. > It’s just astounding that people believe this stuff.  Scratch that — > it’s astounding that people think this stuff even *means* anything. > Cortisol levels?  Oxidative stress?  Neurotransmitters?  Huh?  Do > these people just believe whatever they’re told? > Christ.  Basing your life around a cesspool of fantasy being passed > off as "science" is really not the best approach to living. > Here’s the truth: no one has any idea how the brain works.  No one has > any idea how psychotropic drugs work.  There are no "mental > illnesses." Talking about "serotonin levels" as if you could put a > dipstick in your brain and measure them is laughable.  Don’t be such a > bunch of suckers. > The relationship between consciousness and neurochemistry probably > won’t be unraveled with another thousand years of research. > Just for starters (assuming anyone is willing to think):  When SSRIs > were new, we were supposed to believe that they corrected the specific > "chemical imbalance" that "caused" depression.  They were "selective." > Leaving aside the fact that (1) pharmacodynamic selectivity was > deliberately conflated with selectivity for mood states for marketing > purposes, (2) the causality between neurochemistry and consciousness > isn’t even *slightly* understood, and (3) the phrase "chemical > imbalance" doesn’t actually mean anything, we are now supposed to > believe that these drugs also "cure" "generalized anxiety disorder," > "post-traumatic stress disorder," "obsessive-compulsive disorder," > "social anxiety disorder," an d even fucking PMS for god’s sake.  Wow. > That sounds *really* "selective."  What are the odds that the same > "chemical imbalance" is responsible for virtually every feeling that > someone doesn’t like? > How does "zero" sound? > Stop being such a bunch of idiots being led around by the nose.  Smart > people buy drug company stock.  Dumb people buy drug company products. > This is because there are always more dumb people than smart people.

Response:

> 1) SSRI > selective seratonin reuptake inhibitator…same things as prozac

No it isn’t, it’s an SNRI, also inhibiting the reputake of noradrenaline with about the same potency.  That said, fluoxetine isn’t as selective as the tag suggests, it also has some NRI activity, but to a much lesser extent than venlafaxine. > 3) long term use of SSRI’s is never a good idea unless you MUST have them.

True of any medicine.  Probably most of the bad press about drugs comes from people taking stuff (benzos in particular) that they don’t need; the real killer is that these issues completely overshadow the needs of someone who really *does* need some sort of medication but has a bad adverse reaction to it, who get all but ignored because of the heavy politics surrounding the problems caused by the former situation. Chris.

Response:

> 1) SSRI > selective seratonin reuptake inhibitator…same things as prozac > No it isn’t, it’s an SNRI, also inhibiting the reputake of noradrenaline > with about the same potency.  That said, fluoxetine isn’t as selective > as the tag suggests, it also has some NRI activity, but to a much lesser > extent than venlafaxine.

Effexor IS a SNRI??  If so I am quite mistaken and apoligize. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> 3) long term use of SSRI’s is never a good idea unless you MUST have them. > True of any medicine.  Probably most of the bad press about drugs comes > from people taking stuff (benzos in particular) that they don’t need; > the real killer is that these issues completely overshadow the needs of > someone who really *does* need some sort of medication but has a bad > adverse reaction to it, who get all but ignored because of the heavy > politics surrounding the problems caused by the former situation. > Chris.

Response:

> Effexor IS a SNRI??  If so I am quite mistaken and apoligize.

Not to be confused with an NARI, but it depends on this week’s current official abbreviations, I think.  :)  Seriously, though, it has about equal potency for serotonin and noradrenaline, in theory a bit like a tricyclic without the unwanted gubbins like antihistamine and anticholinergic effects; IME it seems to do something else, maybe direct 5HT2C stimulation a la fluoxetine as it seems to have the potential to be an anxiogenic. Chris.

Response:

Wow, really? You’ve spoiled it for me now: all that research, and it means nothing? None of it’s true? Oh well, let’s just hold hands and put our faith in the lord. Although…now that I think about it, I’d rather take my chances with medicine. Vitriholic www.btlc.com

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > -> > ->Not to be confused with an NARI, but it depends on this week’s > ->current official abbreviations, I think.  :)  Seriously, though, > ->it has about equal potency for serotonin and noradrenaline, in > ->theory a bit like a tricyclic without the unwanted gubbins like > ->antihistamine and anticholinergic effects; IME it seems to do > ->something else, maybe direct 5HT2C stimulation a la fluoxetine > ->as it seems to have the potential to be an anxiogenic. > The kind of "thinking" that goes on in these biopsychiatry posts is so > overloaded with ignorance of neurochemistry, fallacies about what > conclusions follow from what premises, groundless assertions, > breathtaking leaps of illogic, wishful thinking, appeals to authority, > and just flat-out horseshit that it’s hard to know where to even begin > dismantling them. > It’s just astounding that people believe this stuff.  Scratch that — > it’s astounding that people think this stuff even *means* anything. > Cortisol levels?  Oxidative stress?  Neurotransmitters?  Huh?  Do > these people just believe whatever they’re told? > Christ.  Basing your life around a cesspool of fantasy being passed > off as "science" is really not the best approach to living. > Here’s the truth: no one has any idea how the brain works.  No one has > any idea how psychotropic drugs work.  There are no "mental > illnesses." Talking about "serotonin levels" as if you could put a > dipstick in your brain and measure them is laughable.  Don’t be such a > bunch of suckers. > The relationship between consciousness and neurochemistry probably > won’t be unraveled with another thousand years of research. > Just for starters (assuming anyone is willing to think):  When SSRIs > were new, we were supposed to believe that they corrected the specific > "chemical imbalance" that "caused" depression.  They were "selective." > Leaving aside the fact that (1) pharmacodynamic selectivity was > deliberately conflated with selectivity for mood states for marketing > purposes, (2) the causality between neurochemistry and consciousness > isn’t even *slightly* understood, and (3) the phrase "chemical > imbalance" doesn’t actually mean anything, we are now supposed to > believe that these drugs also "cure" "generalized anxiety disorder," > "post-traumatic stress disorder," "obsessive-compulsive disorder," > "social anxiety disorder," an d even fucking PMS for god’s sake.  Wow. > That sounds *really* "selective."  What are the odds that the same > "chemical imbalance" is responsible for virtually every feeling that > someone doesn’t like? > How does "zero" sound? > Stop being such a bunch of idiots being led around by the nose.  Smart > people buy drug company stock.  Dumb people buy drug company products. > This is because there are always more dumb people than smart people.

Response:

> Hello, I have been on prozac for a few years for anxiety and depression. I > heard that Effexor was newer and worked on different chemicals than the > older ssris.  I am thinking of trying new meds.  Has anyone made the switch > to Effexor and if so, was it better?  How is effexor different?  Does it > work better for anxiety then Prozac, is there less side effects (sex drive > etc)?  Any comments appreciated > Thank You

1) SSRI selective seratonin reuptake inhibitator…same things as prozac 2) are you having trouble with prozac? 3) long term use of SSRI’s is never a good idea unless you MUST have them. 4) ask your doctor.

Response:

Hello, I have been on prozac for a few years for anxiety and depression.  I heard that Effexor was newer and worked on different chemicals than the older ssris.  I am thinking of trying new meds.  Has anyone made the switch to Effexor and if so, was it better?  How is effexor different?  Does it work better for anxiety then Prozac, is there less side effects (sex drive etc)?  Any comments appreciated Thank You

Response:

>Hello, I have been on prozac for a few years for anxiety and depression.  I >heard that Effexor was newer and worked on different chemicals than the >older ssris.  I am thinking of trying new meds.  Has anyone made the switch >to Effexor and if so, was it better?  How is effexor different?  Does it >work better for anxiety then Prozac, is there less side effects (sex drive >etc)?  Any comments appreciated >Thank You

BACKGROUND: This was an 8-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study of the efficacy and tolerability of venlafaxine and fluoxetine. METHOD: Outpatients with DSM-III-R major depression, a minimum score of 20 on the 21-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D), and depressive symptoms for at least 1 month were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned to treatment with venlafaxine, 37.5 mg twice daily, or fluoxetine, 20 mg once daily. The dose could be increased to venlafaxine, 75 mg twice daily, or fluoxetine, 20 mg twice daily, after 3 weeks for a poor response. The primary efficacy variables were the final on-therapy scores on the HAM-D, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), and Clinical Global Impressions Severity of Illness (CGI-S) and Improvement (CGI-I) scales. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty-two patients were randomly assigned to therapy and included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Both venlafaxine and fluoxetine produced significant reductions from baseline to day 56 in mean HAM-D, MADRS, and CGI-S scores, but no significant differences were noted between groups. Among patients who increased their dose at 3 weeks, significantly (p < .05) more patients taking venlafaxine than taking fluoxetine had a CGI-I score of 1 (very much improved) at the final evaluation. The most frequent adverse events were nausea, headache, and dizziness with venlafaxine and nausea, headache, and insomnia with fluoxetine. CONCLUSION: These results support the efficacy and tolerability of venlafaxine in comparison with fluoxetine for treating outpatients with major depression. IOW – YMMV — Catholic Church Primer: http://www.nambla.de

Response:

>Hello, I have been on prozac for a few years for anxiety and depression.  I >heard that Effexor was newer and worked on different chemicals than the >older ssris.  I am thinking of trying new meds.  Has anyone made the switch >to Effexor and if so, was it better?  How is effexor different?  Does it >work better for anxiety then Prozac, is there less side effects (sex drive >etc)?  Any comments appreciated

I haven’t tried Prozac, but I have been on Effexor XR 150mg for the last 9 months.  I have gone off of it for a week or two because I think it has raised by blood pressure to dangerous levels (170!). Next week I get another test so I will know if it is the cause.

Response:

Question:

I need to know when Prozac will be available in cheaper generic form. I can’t afford the brand name stuff and my state mental health service cut me off from free treatment. They decided I wasn’t sick enough. As if they had a clue of what’s going on in my brain. Anyway, as soon as anyone knows anything definite about when it will be available generically, please e-mail me as soon as possible! This message will disappear eventually, so please save it and remember to e-mail me when you find out something definite. My future is at stake. Thanks in advance.  ROGER HANE       NO E-MAIL SOLICITORS

Response:

I believe it’s already available.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I need to know when Prozac will be available in cheaper generic form. I can’t > afford the brand name stuff and my state mental health service cut me off from > free treatment. They decided I wasn’t sick enough. As if they had a clue of > what’s going on in my brain. Anyway, as soon as anyone knows anything definite > about when it will be available generically, please e-mail me as soon as > possible! This message will disappear eventually, so please save it and remember > to e-mail me when you find out something definite. My future is at stake. Thanks > in advance. >  ROGER HANE >       NO E-MAIL SOLICITORS

Response:

>I need to know when Prozac will be available in cheaper generic form. I can’t >afford the brand name stuff and my state mental health service cut me off from >free treatment. They decided I wasn’t sick enough. As if they had a clue of >what’s going on in my brain. Anyway, as soon as anyone knows anything definite >about when it will be available generically, please e-mail me as soon as >possible! This message will disappear eventually, so please save it and remember >to e-mail me when you find out something definite. My future is at stake.

I thought generic prozac was already available in the U.S.  Anyway, it is definitely available in Canada and Americans can easily purchase it through the Canadian Drugstore, http://thecanadiandrugstore.com . I buy all my meds (except controlled substances) through them and they offer savings of 30%-50% over American pharmacies.  It is wonderful if you have to pay for your own meds!  All you do is fill out their online questionaire and fax it along with your prescription and they send it to you within 10 days.

Response:

It’s definitely available now.  I have a bottle in my medicine cabinet, which I got from my local Safeway pharmacy (in the US). I think it’s been available for six months or more.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I believe it’s already available. > I need to know when Prozac will be available in cheaper generic form. I > can’t > afford the brand name stuff and my state mental health service cut me off > from > free treatment. They decided I wasn’t sick enough. As if they had a clue > of > what’s going on in my brain. Anyway, as soon as anyone knows anything > definite > about when it will be available generically, please e-mail me as soon as > possible! This message will disappear eventually, so please save it and > remember > to e-mail me when you find out something definite. My future is at stake. > Thanks > in advance. >  ROGER HANE >       NO E-MAIL SOLICITORS

Response:

www.medicinedrugstore.com VERY cheap:) THUS SAYETH WithBACON

Response:

> I need to know when Prozac will be available in cheaper generic form.

It’s available now.  I’m not in the US, but I’ve read quite a number of posts on various NGs and MBs referring to the fact that Americans are taking generic fluoxetine. Here in the UK whether you get branded "Prozac" or generic fluoxetine seems to depend entirely on which pharmacy you take your prescription to.  Some of them don’t seem to keep the branded Eli Lilly version at all, so it was a long time before I actually received a box marked "Prozac". The pharmacy I went to last week gave me my first box which is actually branded "Prozac".  The packaging says that it is "manufactured for Moss Pharmacy by the Product Licence holder Eli Lilly". Jamie

Response:

Question:

Hello. I’ve been using Zoloft + Buspar for a little while now to control a mix of general anxiety and the uncommon panic attack. Because Zoloft has recently gone nonformulary or whatever, I have to switch to something else. I was thinking of just staying on the Buspar, but I have a stressful summer coming up, and I’m worried that Buspar wouldn’t be of any use in fending off potential panic attacks. My doctor suggested Zoloft as a replacement for the Zoloft. I’ve tried Prozac before. The first time was a long-time ago, before I was subject to panic attacks, and I don’t remember any negative effects. Then I tried it again almost two years ago. I was fine for about a month, I think, when I had my first panic attack in a couple of years. Whether the attack was due to the Prozac or to the fact that I had started an internship that week (or both, probably), I don’t know, but I switched to something else. Anyway, I’m thinking of trying Prozac (generic fluoxetine, actually) + Buspar this time. I’ve found info online suggesting that Buspar may help to augment fluoxetine in the treatment of depression. However, I’m wondering how the two interact to affect anxiety and panic attacks. My doctor seems to think they’ll be OK, but I’m not sure. I found one blurb that said the combo helped in three cases, and another blurb describing how the combo actually worsened anxiety in one case. I guess my question, then, is whether any of you have tried or are currently taking both Prozac and Buspar, and whether there were any effects on anxiety and panic. Any help would be appreciated, including any online reference materials that you might be able to point me toward. Thanks much, Mike

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hello. I’ve been using Zoloft + Buspar for a little while now to control a > mix of general anxiety and the uncommon panic attack. Because Zoloft has > recently gone nonformulary or whatever, I have to switch to something else. > I was thinking of just staying on the Buspar, but I have a stressful summer > coming up, and I’m worried that Buspar wouldn’t be of any use in fending off > potential panic attacks. My doctor suggested Zoloft as a replacement for the > Zoloft. > I’ve tried Prozac before. The first time was a long-time ago, before I was > subject to panic attacks, and I don’t remember any negative effects. Then I > tried it again almost two years ago. I was fine for about a month, I think, > when I had my first panic attack in a couple of years. Whether the attack > was due to the Prozac or to the fact that I had started an internship that > week (or both, probably), I don’t know, but I switched to something else. > Anyway, I’m thinking of trying Prozac (generic fluoxetine, actually) + > Buspar this time. I’ve found info online suggesting that Buspar may help to > augment fluoxetine in the treatment of depression. However, I’m wondering > how the two interact to affect anxiety and panic attacks. My doctor seems to > think they’ll be OK, but I’m not sure. I found one blurb that said the combo > helped in three cases, and another blurb describing how the combo actually > worsened anxiety in one case. > I guess my question, then, is whether any of you have tried or are currently > taking both Prozac and Buspar, and whether there were any effects on anxiety > and panic. Any help would be appreciated, including any online reference > materials that you might be able to point me toward. > Thanks much, > Mike

I’m fixing to try both in about a week. Anxious to see if anyone responds. — Amelia Leave out ‘TheJunk’ before replying

Response:

> >I guess my question, then, is whether any of you have tried or are currently >taking both Prozac and Buspar, and whether there were any effects on anxiety >and panic. Any help would be appreciated, including any online reference >materials that you might be able to point me toward. > It can cause seizures.

That’s the 1st I’ve heard of *that and I must say I’m rather doubtful. What are you basing the commment on? — Amelia

Response:

>> >I guess my question, then, is whether any of you have tried or are currently > >taking both Prozac and Buspar, and whether there were any effects on anxiety > >and panic. Any help would be appreciated, including any online reference > >materials that you might be able to point me toward. > It can cause seizures. >That’s the 1st I’ve heard of *that and I must say I’m rather doubtful. >What are you basing the commment on?

I think even nospam got carried away. AFAIK, there is no heightened risk of seizure associated with any of the two drugs mentioned. Ask your pdoc or doc to be sure, but even that is a first for me.

Response:

After 9 years, my 40 mgs/day of prozac pooped out. I went up to 60mgs for 6 weeks but there was no appreciable difference. I have an awful lot of anxiety, too. My shrink put me on 60 mgs of buspar/day which he says will possibly boost prozac’s effect, help with sex, and reduce anxiety. Has anyone had experience with this combination for these symptoms?

Response:

> After 9 years, my 40 mgs/day of prozac pooped out. I went up to 60mgs for 6 > weeks but there was no appreciable difference. I have an awful lot of anxiety, > too. My shrink put me on 60 mgs of buspar/day which he says will possibly boost > prozac’s effect, help with sex, and reduce anxiety. > Has anyone had experience with this combination for these symptoms?

BuSpar worked miracles on my anxiety. I take 10 mg/day. I’m rather surprised your doctor started you at 60, but it’s his call. I get bad gastrointestinal symptoms at 20 mg. Fortunately, 10 works just fine. BuSpar has a reputation for helping with sex drive. It didn’t help me. The only fix I found for sexual problems was to take medications away, not add new ones. As for BuSpar boosting Prozac’s effect, I hope he’s right. Again, BuSpar didn’t do that for me. Mood stabilizers (esp. Lamictal) are good for rejuvenating pooped-out SSRIs. I’m not questioning your doctor’s treatment plan, only letting you know how it went for me. Good luck.

Response:

Question:

Depression Meds: Rigging the definition to boost profits New Statesman (London) 11 March 2002 The  New  Statesman  Special  Report  -  The  rebranding  of a disease Should  we  trust  the scientific data on the effects of drugs? Not if the case of depression, for which pharmaceutical companies found a new definition, is anything to go by. Jerome Burne reports If  the  directors  of drug companies are in the habit of taking their own   medicines,   then   consumption  of  anti-depressants  in  their boardrooms should have soared last month. Not least to show solidarity in  the  face  of  growing  concerns  that Prozac-type anti-depression drugs,  one  of the biggest pharmaceutical success stories of the past decade, may be not only dangerous to some, but also addictive. The magazine Health, Which came out with a warning that patients being offered  anti-depressants  were  often  not told "about issues such as withdrawal  problems  or  .  . . a possible risk of increased suicidal behaviour",   and  the  Royal  College  of  Psychiatrists  issued  new guidelines,  saying  that  only 50 per cent of patients would be "much improved" after taking anti-depressants, which is little better than a placebo.  Meanwhile,  in the United States, the issue of addiction was highlighted  when the Food and Drug Administration ordered the company GlaxoSmithKline to warn doctors prescribing the drug Seroxat about the possibility of dependency. The company was also found in breach of the industry code by describing problems with withdrawal as "very rare". All of this came in the wake of a court case last June, brought by the family  of  a  man  who,  a  few  days after being put on the drug for sleeping  problems,  had shot his daughter, his grandchildren and then himself. The court agreed with the family’s claim that Seroxat (one of a  class of drugs known as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs)  had contributed to his behaviour, and awarded them $6.4m. This was  the  second case linking SSRIs with suicide to come to court, but more than 200 have been settled out of court. What  makes  this all the more alarming is that the drugs involved are so widely used – prescriptions for all SSRIs in the UK run at about 10 million.  They  are  increasingly  prescribed  for  a  wide variety of conditions,  such  as  skin complaints, pre- menstrual tension, weight loss  and  attention-deficit  disorder.  But  it  also raises the more important  and  wider question: can we trust the drug companies? Or is there  a  strong possibility that their business practices could leave both  doctors  and  patients  with  no way of telling just how safe or effective our medications are? When  it  comes  to  spin, the drug companies make the government look clumsy  and  amateurish. At the heart of the worries over SSRIs is the growing  belief  that the drug companies have been less than honest in their account of the risks involved. But it is not just SSRIs that are given  a  positive  gloss  when  the evidence points the other way. In January, for instance, Swiss prosecutors began a criminal inquiry into the pharmaceutical giant Bayer AG, "on suspicion of fraud and grievous bodily  damage",  following  the  recall last year of the cholesterol- lowering  drug  cerivastatin (otherwise known as Lipobay in Europe and Baycol  in  the US). The prosecutors are accusing Bayer of suppressing vital  information about the drug’s potentially fatal interaction with another drug, which has been linked to more than 50 deaths. Could  the  drug companies do such a thing? The editors of the world’s top  11  medical  journals,  including the Lancet, the British Medical Journal  and  the New England Journal of Medicine, certainly think so. Last September, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors issued  a  joint  statement  calling for more openness in the way drug companies report their results and less readiness to hide unfavourable ones.  The  editors  declared  that  they will now "require authors to attest that they had full access to all of the data in [a] study and . .  .  [to]  take complete responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis". The  point  about  having "full access to all of the data" is crucial, because  it  lies  at  the root of how science works. Only if they can look at the raw data are other scientists able to judge how reasonable is the interpretation. But all too often, the results from drug trials are  presented  in  the  form of tables, and the drug companies refuse access  to  the  raw  data  on  the  grounds  that  it is commercially sensitive. However,  the  concerns  of  the  journal  editors  on this point were clearly  not  enough.  In  February,  the  UK’s  National Institute of Clinical   Excellence   (Nice)   claimed  that  "drug  companies  have successfully  withheld important data". Gauging the efficacy of a drug is  fraught  with  problems, declared Dr Iain Chalmers of the Cochrane Centre,  an  organisation  set  up to evaluate the efficacy of medical treatments,  "because negative results are rarely published in medical journals". The moral vacuum that results from constant spinning is threatening to suck  in  not  just the academics who are paid to do the work for drug companies, but the whole process of scientific medicine. In an article last  September  entitled  "Dancing  with the porcupine", the Canadian Medical  Association Journal attempted to set out some principles that ought  to  apply  when pharmaceutical companies are funding academics. The  authors  start  by recognising that such alliances are inherently tricky:  "The  duty of the universities is to seek the truth. The duty of  the  pharmaceutical  companies is to make money." But, and this is the  important  bit,  "if  either abandons its fundamental mission, it ultimately  fails".  A broke drug company or a discredited academic is no use to anyone. The  attempt to hammer out some sort of guidelines was set against the background of at least two highly publicised Canadian cases where drug companies   had  used  "intimidating  tactics"  that  had  "profoundly affected"  researchers’ lives. One involved a lawsuit by Bristol-Myers Squibb against the Canadian Co-ordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment  to  suppress  a  report  on the cholesterol-lowering drugs statins.  The  other  was  the  legal  threat by AstraZeneca against a researcher   at  Ontario’s  McMaster  University  for  her  review  of medications for stomach disorders. Even  if  matters  don’t  get  as far as the courts, "industry funding creates  an  incentive  to  promote  the  positive  and  suppress  the negative",  says  the  journal.  An  example is the "landmark article" showing  that  industry-sponsored research into certain heart drugs is more likely to be supportive of their use than is independently funded research.  The  conclusion  argues  for the drawing up of some sort of industry/university  contract  containing clauses giving academics the right  to "disclose potentially harmful clinical effects immediately", for  a  surcharge  on  contracts  to  fund  a regulatory body, for the setting up of an ombudsman, and so on. All  very  well  and good, but getting regulatory bodies to respond to concerns  about  some drugs can be hard work. That, at least, has been the experience of the psychiatrist Dr David Healy who, since 1999, has been  engaged  in  extensive  correspondence  with  the UK’s Medicines Control  Agency  (MCA)  over  the  links  between  SSRIs,  suicide and addiction.  Their exchange of letters now runs to more than 100 pages, with  the  majority  of  that coming from Healy. As of last month, the agency’s  position  is that there is no cause for concern and that all the warnings that are needed are in place. What  makes  Healy’s  campaign  of particular interest is, first, that he’s  no maverick, driven by a belief in herbs or the healing power of madness.  He  is  a mainstream biological psychiatrist and director of the North Wales Department of Psychological Medicine in Bangor, he has written   a   highly  acclaimed  history  of  anti-depressants  -  The Anti-depressant Era, published by Harvard University Press – and he is the  author  of  more  than 100 scientific papers. But he is concerned that  patients  and  the profession are not being told the truth about the risks. His  campaign also gains added weight from his experience as an expert witness  in two American court cases involving suicide and SSRIs. As a result,  he has seen previously unpublished data on trials carried out by  the  drug  companies  on  healthy  volunteers. His analysis of the secret  data,  the sort that drug companies usually refuse to release, shows  that about 25 per cent of healthy volunteers given the drug had some  sort  of  unpleasant psychological reaction. "That suggests that the  likelihood of someone committing suicide during their first month of  treatment  with  Prozac  is  ten  times  greater than if they were untreated,"  he  says.  "That is a level of risk approaching that of a smoker’s likelihood of developing lung cancer." This  suggests  an astonishing gap between what the drug companies say publicly  and what their own data shows. As a striking illustration of this gap between secret and public knowledge, Healy is fond of quoting a  story  from an American newspaper, the Boston Globe, which appeared in May 2000. It concerned a new form of Prozac, known as R-fluoxetine, which had been patented in 1993 (US patent no 5,708,035) and which Eli Lilly  planned  to  market when the existing patent ran out in 2002. A patent  application  requires  that you say why your new version is an improvement.  So  what were the benefits of R-fluoxetine? "It will not produce several existing side effects, including akathsia [agitation], suicidal thoughts and self-mutilation . . . one of its [Prozac's] more … read more »

Response:

> Depression Meds: Rigging the definition to boost profits > New Statesman (London) > 11 March 2002 > The  New  Statesman  Special  Report  -  The  rebranding  of a disease

Very good article – thank you – hope it gets replays Squiggles

Response:

Question:

> My son used to take Celexa and I believe he took it in the morning.  It > couldn’t hurt for you to try for a few days and see what happens.  I always > take my prozac in the morning, but then the pdoc recommends that as well.

i take an SSRI too, sertraline (Zoloft)… i was told to take it in the morning because SSRIs have a mild stimulant effect and can cause sleep disturbance if you take them at night… what matters i think is that you take them at the same time each day, regardless of when… hugs m — ~~~~~~>><:>~~~~~~ iriXx " you can try the best you can    you can try the best you can …the best you can is good enough" radiohead: optomistic

Response:

hi there.. Here is my current med regime – my question follows: Morning: 37.5 mg Effexor  <— am being weaned off this, won’t take it next week              900 mg Gabapentin Evening:  50 mg. Celexa              1200 mg. Gabapentin Okay you Celexa folks, do you take your Celexa in the morning on in the evening? I am starting to think it may not be the best med for me to take at night as I am not sleeping well. I get 3-4 hours very light sleep if I don’t take a sleep med, or 5 – 6 hours of a deeper sleep if I give in and take 7.5 mg. Imovane (Canadian non-benzodiazepine sleep med). Gabapentin folks – do you think it is the Gabapentin keeping me on such a light sleep regime? thanks so much everyone, Compucat  >^+^<

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > hi there.. > Here is my current med regime – my question follows: > Morning: 37.5 mg Effexor  <— am being weaned off this, won’t take it next > week >              900 mg Gabapentin > Evening:  50 mg. Celexa >              1200 mg. Gabapentin > Okay you Celexa folks, do you take your Celexa in the morning on in the > evening? I am starting to think it may not be the best med for me to take at > night as I am not sleeping well. I get 3-4 hours very light sleep if I don’t > take a sleep med, or 5 – 6 hours of a deeper sleep if I give in and take 7.5 > mg. Imovane (Canadian non-benzodiazepine sleep med).

My son used to take Celexa and I believe he took it in the morning.  It couldn’t hurt for you to try for a few days and see what happens.  I always take my prozac in the morning, but then the pdoc recommends that as well. > Gabapentin folks – do you think it is the Gabapentin keeping me on such a > light sleep regime?

Fo me I am having a lot of trouble with neurontin (gabapentin) making me sleepy.  I take a larger dose of it at bedtime and it usually helps me to sleep better.  But then that just shows how different we all are with the same meds. I hope your sleep gets better soon Compucat. Bonnie – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> thanks so much everyone, > Compucat  >^+^<

Response:

Question:

Has anyone switched from Prozac to generic fluoxetine?  If so, have you noticed any differences. thanks, marks

Response:

hi Mark – both had worked exactly the same. The generic Prozac (called Fluoxetine) was fine with me, and it was cheaper to boot! — regards, Compucat

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Has anyone switched from Prozac to generic fluoxetine?  If so, have you > noticed any differences. > thanks, > marks

Response:

Question:

I am deeply sorry about your suffering. For now you may want to take some Kava root for the start-up anxiety on the Prozac. (http://biopsychiatry.com/kava/index.html) As for the insomnia, look into some over-the-counter Benadryl (diphenhydramine), or Nytol (doxylamine succinate: http://www.nytol.com).  These are antihistamines with long and safe records As for the 4 weeks that it takes for a med to kick in, know that those 4 weeks are going to come and go whether you want them to or not, so you might as well work on your emotional wellness in that time with medical treatment… Keeping your best interest in mind, Sal

Response:

newsreader… > Aug. 7, 2001 — What do you give the menopausal depressed woman who’s > tried everything? Effexor, according to a study presented recently at > the World Assembly for Mental Health in Vancouver.

It’s got so many scary side effects and withdrawal problems, why did they give it to a 20 year old that hasn’t tried anything else yet?  I don’t want to be on this if I’m never going to be able to get off it! — "The Truth knocks on the door, and you say, ‘Go away – I’m looking for the truth.’ And so it goes away. Puzzling." — Robert Pirsig, "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance"

Response:

Hi and Welcome to the ng, > I am doing bad now.

I am so sorry… >Real bad. I cry, panic, just plain need to get away > from myself. It is bad. I cry & cry, I am so tired, yet am having problems > sleeping. I have been off meds for 4 months, and the last med I was > perscribed was prozac. I am too afraid to take it, and I cannot waite for > a med to kick in. What can I do? Please, suggest something. Also, i heard > prozac makes you more anxious at first couple days.

It sounds as if you do need an AD. Why are you fearful of Prozac? There are many med options. http://my.webmd.com/content/article/1728.85773 Antidepressant Effexor Good Choice for Older Women Launches Two-Pronged Attack on Depression By