Anti Depressant Brain Damage Link?

idlesupernova

Is there any evidence that anti depressants can cause minor brain damage? Inability or hard time having to drive, change plugs, jigsaws etc yet be perfectly able in speech, jobs life in general. Any info appreciated

eth0_

That's not brain damage :-)
Sounds like a side effect though. What drug are you on? I took effexor for a while and I found it affected my co-ordination and concentration.

Speak to your doctor about it, maybe your dose is too high or you need to be on another drug.

N8

idlesupernova wrote: »

Is there any evidence that anti depressants can cause minor brain damage? Inability or hard time having to drive, change plugs, jigsaws etc yet be perfectly able in speech, jobs life in general. Any info appreciated

you haven't said what you are depressed about nor how long you have been on them Idle but if you are taking a substance which ultimately changes your brain chemistry there is always a good chance other brain functions are going to be affected full stop. Maybe try something else other than an antidepressants - omega 3 and 9 oils, other nutrients, perhaps try the now illegal St John's Wort (how did we ever allow this happen?) and above all the number one - exercise.

“Over half of all the nerve impulses being sent between your brain and body in your spinal cord are for the delivery of movement stimulation to the brain.

Movement charges your brain's battery and makes you able to think better, feel better, and function better.

At first researchers thought that it was just the exercise that improved brain and overall health due to increased blood flow and oxygen supply etc. Further research has shown that aerobic activity is not what is responsible for the amazing benefits of proper movement stimulation of the brain. It is the neurological stimulation of the pathways between moving joints, especially spinal joints, and the brain that are responsible.”

Idle Good Luck M8

bip232

yeah, I definately noticed a complete loss of concentration while taking them, I found it so hard to pay attention in college and follow what was going on and I lost things frequently ( importants things like keys,bank cards & even my passport!) I stopped taking them a year ago and I feel like myself again.I have my bad days but I've changed my diet and taken up regular exercise because my councillor suggested it and I feel like I have it under control,

bip232

Apologies for spelling:eek:

PoleStar

Best advice: speak to your doctor.

As for the comment on St. John's Wort. I will tell you why its now banned. St. John's Wort is an effective anti depresant because the compounds it contains fall into a class of drug known as tri-cyclic antidepressants or TCA's which are not so commonly used nowadays. The reason for banning it are the fact that the dose in the herb is not known. TCA's can interact with a wide variety of drugs (prescription and over the counter) and also foods such as red wine, and even cheese! to produce very nasty reactions. Patients given presciption medications of TCAs are given strict advice. Unfortunately, this is not he case with St. John's wort of course.

People seem to still have the idea that if its no on prescription and is a herb then its not really a drug and so has no side effects, which is simply not the case of course.

N8

PoleStar wrote: »

Best advice: speak to your doctor.

Yes get right back on track with some more medication that will affect your concentration, co-ordination and memory! It may also have the uncommon but not rare side effect of psychosis, suicidal thoughts, violent and aggressive behaviour and the lesser known effects of increased diabetes risk and the kicker– a reduced sperm count!

PoleStar wrote: »

As for the comment on St. John's Wort. I will tell you why its now banned. St. John's Wort is an effective anti depresant because the compounds it contains fall into a class of drug known as tri-cyclic antidepressants or TCA's which are not so commonly used nowadays. The reason for banning it are the fact that the dose in the herb is not known. TCA's can interact with a wide variety of drugs (prescription and over the counter) and also foods such as red wine, and even cheese! to produce very nasty reactions. Patients given presciption medications of TCAs are given strict advice. Unfortunately, this is not he case with St. John's wort of course.

People seem to still have the idea that if its no on prescription and is a herb then its not really a drug and so has no side effects, which is simply not the case of course.

Good answer but either disingenuous or not fully informed perhaps give this website a visit: http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/

St. John's Wort is effective in treating depression. It is a medicinal herb frequently blamed for interfering with prescription drugs, but don’t antidepressants also affect and interact with other prescriptive drugs?

May by crossing the border into N.Ireland this helps the body reduce this interaction in some mysterious manner unknown yet to science?

Its ban in Ireland is part and parcel of the global vitamin and supplement ban being pushed by pharmaceutical companies under CODEX regulations, which will have the effect essentially of outlawing any food, herb or natural substance that actually promotes health.

If you think it’s another ‘conspiracy’ look no further than the attempt under these same regulations in the UK in March to ban goji berries….. yes berries!http://www.newstarget.com/021670.html

Personally I would not use St John’s Wort for any length of time either since it is really doing nothing more than the drug, i.e. masking its symptoms. It is still done with a chemical whether it came form a drug or an herb.

It is always much better to eliminate the depression at its source, and engage in trying to achieve a higher state of health is to pursue a healthy lifestyle through nutrition (omega 3 and B vitamins especially in depression), physical activity, exposure to natural sunlight, strong social interaction, brain exercise and spinal health, postural integrity, good breathing, staying away from environmental toxins, and so on. Experience laughter. It's good medicine too M8.

Good to hear you are doing well bip232 Good Luck

tallaght01

Doctors don't treat all depression with medication lol!!!

But I guess N8 has a lot of experience in the GP consulting rooms, dealing with all the people who present with low mood.

Polestar is of course correct about the potential problems with St Johns wort. You can argue whatever you want, and quote as many alternative health websites you want as evidence, but the chemical structure of the active ingredient is there for all to see.

As someone who has worked in the UK for many years, I can tell you that just because something hasn't been banned, don't mean it ain't bad for you. The alternative health industry is a huge money making machine in the UK, and is a very powerful lobby, although I'm not sure where the st johns wort argument is at in the UK right now.

You just need to be careful with alternative meds. Most are harmless. But at least with prescription meds you know what you're getting, and in what doses. Many "natural" meds have steroids and oestrogens in them.

eth0_

N8 wrote: »

St. John's Wort is effective in treating depression. It is a medicinal herb frequently blamed for interfering with prescription drugs, but don’t antidepressants also affect and interact with other prescriptive drugs?

Prescription drugs are CONTROLLED, i.e. your doctor and pharmacist will be aware of interactions with any other drugs you are taking.

Let me guess, you don't think depression has bio/chemical causes despite all the evidence that proves it is? :rolleyes:

If you had cancer would you treat it with vitamins and lots of sunlight rather than surgery and chemo/radiotherapy?

Alternative medicine has its place but (just like prescribed drugs) it isn't always the best course of action.

N8

eth0_ wrote: »

Prescription drugs are CONTROLLED, i.e. your doctor and pharmacist will be aware of interactions with any other drugs you are taking.

hmmm that would explain the numbers of people dying having taken the right prescription in the right amount for the right symptoms/disease and who then die.

Your doctor may not be aware of interactions with any other drugs you are taking, nor may a busy pharmacist reliant on a busy doctor making the right decision. Recently I spoke with someone having being released from hospital (having being admitted with seizures) who was given an antibiotic on leaving, got the prescription and read the information when they got home. Yes the medication was contraindicated with those with a history of seizures.

Not only that but ehy had to go then and find a GP on a Saturday, pay the GP and then pay for a different prescription...

eth0_ wrote: »

Let me guess, you don't think depression has bio/chemical causes despite all the evidence that proves it is? :rolleyes: .

No of course it does have as one of its many causes a bio/chemical cause but it is not the only cause and to use drugs as a first course of action given the seriousness of not only the condition but the many side effects inc (from above)... ‘psychosis, suicidal thoughts, violent and aggressive behaviour and the lesser known effects of increased diabetes risk and.. reduced sperm count’ is perhaps reckless and endangering.

eth0_ wrote: »

If you had cancer would you treat it with vitamins and lots of sunlight rather than surgery and chemo/radiotherapy?

Etho I know this is aimed at the ‘hippies’ but it is a question I have often asked myself both in relation to myself should it ever occur or God forbid one of my family.

From your question it is safe to assume that you feel that cancer has fundamentally a bio/chemical cause. If this was the case why has the thirty year war and trillions of dollars worth of research not won against cancer?

I have boiled down my thoughts to this: I would do what has been proven to be the most effective. Surgery and chemo/radiotherapy aren’t really that effective when it boils down to it.

For me I always found a difficulty in accepting a strategy of cutting a person and then poisoning them so harshly that hopefully the cancer was killed off before the person was.



Some reading in regard to alternative cancer care I read recently is: Living Proof by Michael Gearin Tosh

eth0_ wrote: »

Alternative medicine has its place but (just like prescribed drugs) it isn't always the best course of action.

I agree. I also agree there is a place for some common sense. Most people know the place of alternative medicine and complementary therapies, the problem is that most doctors don’t.

eth0_

Your posts are dangerous and misleading. There is NO proof that alternate therapy can cure or even reduce cancerous cells.

Alternative therapies have their place in the treatment of serious illness, but mostly to make the patient FEEL better.

Cancer treatment has come a massive way in the past 30 years. Look at the mortality rates for cancers 30 years ago and for recent years and then try to tell me conventional cancer treatments are no good! :mad:

N8

eth0_ wrote: »

Your posts are dangerous and misleading.

They are neither. They are informed discourse.

eth0_ wrote: »

There is NO proof that alternate therapy can cure or even reduce cancerous cells.

There isn't?

eth0_ wrote: »

Alternative therapies have their place in the treatment of serious illness, but mostly to make the patient FEEL better.

The alternates I refer to do not include any disciplines with little or no research. When I talk of alternate I intend the inclusion of the likes of acupuncture, chiropractic, osteopathy and proven nutritional approaches. Many of the alternates you may be referring to seem to have little other than a temporary mood lift. I do not refer to these.

The patient feels better because they are better. The alternate approaches I refer to are in the main vitalistic in nature and aimed at increasing over all wellbeing and the creation of salutogensis (as opposed to pathogenesis) rather than segregated approach of an allopath.

This does not mean that I do not believe that it is necessary sometimes to use surgery and or chem/radiotherapy but it is never appropriate not to address the overall lack of health in a patient presenting with cancer or any illness.

Nor should a doctor be burdened with all the responsibility for a patient who has never looked after themselves and continued with a lifestyle against all advice that has in essence rewarded them with ill health, but this is an issue for another day.

eth0_ wrote: »

Cancer treatment has come a massive way in the past 30 years. Look at the mortality rates for cancers 30 years ago and for recent years and then try to tell me conventional cancer treatments are no good! :mad:

It has in some area mostly childhood cancers. However, we are no closer to winning a war on cancer than we were thirty years ago. I did not say that cancer treatments are no good. What I did say is that they weren’t really that effective when it boiled down to it and they are not.

The numbers of people who with ever compromised immune systems allowing cancer develop in their bodies is on the increase. 1 in 3. This added to the increased stress or day to day life and the ever increasing environmental toxins we are all exposed to means that it is more and more likely never to be won.

There is room for an alternate approach. Some even would say abandonment of the war.

eth0_

Can you please provide us with peer reviewed papers that backup your claim that alternative medicine is effective in curing or reducing cancers.

N8

eth0_ wrote: »

Can you please provide us with peer reviewed papers that backup your claim that alternative medicine is effective in curing or reducing cancers.

eth0_ with respect, my pandering to your laziness and bias at the expense of my free time would be non productive since generally these sort of disagreements come to nothing and I will never change your mind.

I quoted a book earlier in regard to alternative cancer care: Living Proof by Michael Gearin Tosh. here is a link to it at amazon.com. It is full of the papers you requested (over a hundred are referenced), it is easily read and the last chapter is actually a case history peer reviewed by various doctors, professors and specialists in Oncology.

Enjoy reading.

John

N8 wrote: »

eth0_ with respect, my pandering to your laziness and bias at the expense of my free time would be non productive since generally these sort of disagreements come to nothing and I will never change your mind.

Well it's only fair for you to link to all these sources that you've read as obviously you know the exact articles that back up your claims. There's that much rubbish on google that unless you've an idea where to look we're not going to find the papers that you've read. I wouldn't expect you to go search for a paper I have read, I'd link to it. This is assuming of course that you have references for all the things you've mentioned.

As for the fight against cancer not being a success, the figures say otherwise. Granted in some areas the survival rate is still extremely low but the figures are creeping upwards nonetheless. I have never seen any research to show that it is only in childhood cancers that survival rates are climbing, where did you see this?

N8

John wrote: »

Well it's only fair for you to link to all these sources that you've read as obviously you know the exact articles that back up your claims.

your right John and I did.

John wrote: »

There's that much rubbish on google that unless you've an idea where to look we're not going to find the papers that you've read. I wouldn't expect you to go search for a paper I have read, I'd link to it. This is assuming of course that you have references for all the things you've mentioned.

hundreds of them in the book

John wrote: »

As for the fight against cancer not being a success, the figures say otherwise. Granted in some areas the survival rate is still extremely low but the figures are creeping upwards nonetheless.

The rises are miserly and given the amount of money thrown into it, it has been a failure. You haven't mentioned that this is due not to any research breakthroughs or indeed refinement of surgery or chem/radiotherapy, it is almost entirely down to early detection.

John wrote: »

I have never seen any research to show that it is only in childhood cancers that survival rates are climbing, where did you see this?

Personally I would have thought this common knowledge, the survival rates for children cancers are much better than adult and in some areas like leukaemia survivla is almost expected whereas thirty years ago it was not.

Do you really believe the war on cancer is being won? John respectfully you are deluded and not living in the real world. Are people healthier?

If it were solely private enterprise devoid of public money and vested interest it would have concentrated on another avenue a long time ago.

r3nu4l

N8, here we go again

Unfortunately, I recall a book published some years ago now, called "The River" (iirc) about the origins of the HIV virus. The author in question was using thousands of published scientific papers to construct a claim that HIV was a virus genetically engineered by humans. (This despite the fact that we now know HIV existed around the time that the structure of DNA was discovered - how we were supposed to have engineered a virus without knowing anything about DNA structure and PCR I just don't know!)

While he referenced many papers, he 'took liberties' with his train of thought and engaged in massive 'leaps of logic' that were not based on anything other than his opinion. The result was a farcical piece of rubbish dressed up as a massive thesis of scientific review.

My point?

Too many authors are quoting studies out of context and twisting the results to their own agendas, especially in books that are not peer-reviewed! :mad: That annoys me greatly.

I've seen some of the stuff you've posted on this forum before and note that you really don't like producing strong scientifically accredited evidence. Therefore I refuse to waste any time trawling through anything you refer to looking for the 'evidence'. I think if you make a claim you should spend time picking out the exact quotes from the papers cited in that book to support your claim.

Now, the war on cancer!
Ever heard of CML? - it's a form of leukaemia.
Survival rates have tripled in adults since the launch of glivec in 2001. These rates are due to increase even further now that Tasigna has received US approval and will soon have European approval. This war is being won in both adults and children in the very cancer you are claiming the war is being lost in, so your 'common knowledge' goes out the window along with any credibility you had. Which by the way was already practically at zero!

N8

r3nu4l wrote: »

Too many authors are quoting studies out of context and twisting the results to their own agendas, especially in books that are not peer-reviewed! :mad: That annoys me greatly.

r3nu4l I did mention the last chapter is a case history peer reviewed.

r3nu4l wrote: »

Now, the war on cancer! Ever heard of CML? - it's a form of leukaemia. Survival rates have tripled in adults since the launch of glivec in 2001. These rates are due to increase even further now that Tasigna has received US approval and will soon have European approval.

WOW one wonder drug for trillions of dollars, paid for by the public so private pharmaceutical companies may profit. Hey now we can get a form leukaemia and there is a treatment….

r3nu4l wrote: »

This war is being won in both adults and children in the very cancer you are claiming the war is being lost in, so your 'common knowledge' goes out the window along with any credibility you had. Which by the way was already practically at zero!

My feelings are hurt now r3nu4l. I really need the respect of a medic and pharmaceutical research expert in the failure that is the current allopathic reductionist science to boost my self regard.

The war is not being won get over yourself. More and more people are contracting cancer and dying from it. The survivors in many cases go on to die from relapses.

The fact remains; there are alternates in cancer therapy and alternates to being victims of cancer and its medical treatment.

It’s a good job too given the impending implosion of the health care system in Ireland.

eth0_

N8 if you can't produce proof of your statements that don't involve us having to order a book off amazon, then you'll understand why people think you are a troll/quack.

You are being very arrogant and this is doing nothing to help anyone's belief in alternative medicine as being anything other than a complementary treatment.

John

N8, from that book of hundreds of articles/studies, are there any online or similar research by a representative author? I don't want to buy a book just to get your point (I'd never suggest you do the same, I'd find similar research online) and if the research is good it must be reproduced by someone somewhere.

As for cancer survival only lowering because of earlier detection, yes this plays a role but it would be foolish to dismiss better drugs having no impact on top of this. And surely cancer detection is still a big research area and one that should be explored so people can know that they need some form of treatment (whatever route they take)?

As for me being deluded, I take all evidence with a pinch of salt, even traditionally reputable sources because that is the way science works. Do I think people are healthier? In what way? I think less people are facing a bleak and short future due to cancer (if you look at the figures I linked to, survival rates for some of the cancers are up 7-9%, that is tens of thousands of people in real numbers), people are living longer and being more active into older age so yes, I think in general people are healthier. I think things could be better but I don't think wholesale dismissal of mainstream medicine is the way to do it. I don't think wholesale dismissal of alternative medicine is the way to go either might I add, I have seen a rise in good research being done on acupuncture both in human and animal models of several diseases. My point is that no one is out to put down alternative medicine for the sheer thrill of it, I'll gladly accept it as soon as I see good evidence for it. If the book you've recommended is as good as you say, then the research done in it will have been expanded upon since publication and there should be papers online to reflect that.

r3nu4l

N8 wrote: »

WOW one wonder drug for trillions of dollars, paid for by the public so private pharmaceutical companies may profit. Hey now we can get a form leukaemia and there is a treatment….

Er, Glivec and Tasigna are TWO different drugs :rolleyes:
It's no wonder I don't take you seriously if you can't even bother to read other peoples posts correctly.

I find it amazing that you are clearly prepared to accept almost any statement of 'evidence' penned by authors from 'your side' of the debate yet continually dismiss 'reductionist' science. That's bigotry coming from the person who claims that scientists and medics are bigoted against alternative treatments

FYI, I do believe that I have stated previously that I accept that certain branches of alternative/complimentary medicine are very effective as treatments for some ailments. Bigotry is not my problem, my problem lies with facetious claims based on very little hard evidence.

Back to cancer:
So I've provided information on use of Glivec in the treatment of CML. It is also used to treat GIST (Gastrointestinal stromal tumours) extremely effectively...that's two cancers that are being treated excellently by that drug so that's better value for money for you

tallaght01

N8, yor claims are pretty wild. You say that most of the improved cancer survival is de to improved survival in children's cancers. Then you also say that most of the increase in survival is down to early detection. As far as I'm aware, the evidence for increasing survival in childhood malignancy is certainly not down to early detection. in fact. childood cancers are often relatively easy to diagnose. The evidence I'm aware of suggests that the improved survival is down to improved treatment. Ask the parent of a childhood leaukaemia sufferer if you can use alternative remedies as an alternative to chemotherapy, and see what they say.

In this thread you have posted so much unsubstantiated claims that it woud be impossible to deal with them each individually.

What i would suggest you do is to list your references from this wonderous book of yours. Pick the references that show that we're not improving cancer survival. Pick the references that back up the point you make. So taht when you say we are no closer to winning the fight against cancer than we were 30 years ago, you can reference your evidence base (ie actual papers) after the statement.

Many of the people you are arguing with here will ave access to athens or other similiar databases of journal articles, so if you actually give us the references, we can access them online.

It would certainly help people to take you more seriously.

Having said that, we'e had this discussion before, and I don't see it going anywhere, but we may aswell to try to tease this ou into an actual evidenced based discussion....

Also, bear in mind that if it's in a book, it doesn't make it true. If it's on the web, it doesn't make it true. If it's peer-reviewed it doesn't make it true. The famously discredited MMR article by andrew wakefield et al was in a peer-reviewed journal!

Just present your evidence as referenced articles, and let's debate the evidence. Makes a lot more sense than debating your inability to provide evidence.

DrIndy

50% of all cancers are now cured through modern medicine and surgery - that is not just survivial rate, but CURE rate. These are fair enough skewed towards skin cancers which are caught early as they are so obvious as well as better breast cancer screening and colon cancer screening.

You cannot ignore the data that even though chemotherapy and radiotherapy is unpleasant and yes, they are poisons to the body - but do deliver significant prolongation of life and do offer complete cures. Chemotherapy in the last decade has advanced so significantly as well that the unpleasant side effects are well reduced as well as the new molecular therapies out there are virtually side effect free.

You really need to substantiate your answers with data, not opinion.

Kevster

I have been taking Lexapro for three years and am quite confidant that it has not damaged my brain. On the contrary, it helps me concentrate and relax to some extent. I surely hope I'm not irrevocably damaging my brain by taking it.

N8

Hi All sorry for dropping out – long work hours.

eth0_, you may laugh but I had to look up the meaning of troll on the net and found out that generally trolling involves posting controversial or contrary messages with the intention of baiting an argumentative response.

This is not my intention nor was it here. My advice in regard to the OP was sound in general and no one countered it. I simply mentioned St. John's Wort being banned and it was this was picked up and how we got to this. Then you yourself made some controversial comments which I countered. Do not mistake my not being intimidated for arrogance.

There is then the debate whether the war against cancer is being won. The fact is there are more cancer s than there were thirty years ago. I think (no reference) that I saw a figure of something like I in 5 people got cancer twenty years ago and that now in Ireland 1 in 3 (moving very close to 1 in 2) people’s bodies develop cancer. Yesterday in the news I read that 30% of those “cured” of cancer suffer either a relapse or they go on to develop cancer of another part of the body. Does that sound like anything close to winning against cancer?

John cancer detection is not only a research area but one of vested interest. Mammography involves irradiating the breasts. Thermography is showing promise of being every bit as good and does not have the side effect of actually causing the very cancers it is employed to detect yet it is not used. “What would we do with our mammography machines?”

How many of you guys would be up for an examination that involved having your testes man handled by someone you don’t know then having them squeezed in a machine and irradiated? Think about that for a minute.


John the research you have seen in regard to acupuncture you are only seeing because it fits into an allopathic model and because it is thought of as a therapy to be taught at weekends to therapists, nurses and GPs alike. It is not the traditional acupuncture as you know it.

John the book is excellent. You would enjoy it.


R3nu4l cheers for correcting the numbers there at least that gave me a real smile – cheers. I also accept your point about the bigotry but having thought it over it is not that. The world of medical research at present is driven by pharmaceutical giants and in the last few years this has come more and more to light.


Tallaght01 we cross swords again The rates of survival for children’s cancer in the main outstrip that for adults. The rate of early detection in adults is going up thanks both to increased awareness increased programs of detection and importantly an increase in the rate of cancer itself.

tallaght01 wrote: »

Ask the parent of a childhood leaukaemia sufferer if you can use alternative remedies as an alternative to chemotherapy, and see what they say.

That’s an obvious one since they will not wish to fall out with the team treating their child. The fact remains though that cancer sufferers are never healthy to begin with and almost a third relapse or suffer cancer of another part of the body. Perhaps in tandem with fighting the cancer they should be concentrating on a program of care addressing their overall health?

You are right as before I am not bothered to make it an evidence based debate since most of it is widely known, widely available and would be inordinately time consuming to attain and no doubt wouldn’t be read. Besides you just blew any thought of me looking for such research with the statement “if it's peer-reviewed it doesn't make it true, which would mean even if I spend the time looking it up you would dismiss it anyway??”

You want us to discuss the research, its quality, its conclusion, do a meta analysis and then be told I don’t believe it. Thanks but no thanks.


Dr Indy you tell me that I need to substantiate your answers with data, not opinion, and then make claims as to cure rates etc without any data either which run against what has over the last few days been splashed all over the news.

Kevster wrote: »

I have been taking Lexapro for three years and am quite confidant that it has not damaged my brain. On the contrary, it helps me concentrate and relax to some extent. I surely hope I'm not irrevocably damaging my brain by taking it.

Kevster I do hope it isn’t good luck to you

virtus

idlesupernova wrote: »

Is there any evidence that anti depressants can cause minor brain damage? Inability or hard time having to drive, change plugs, jigsaws etc yet be perfectly able in speech, jobs life in general. Any info appreciated

Antidepressants fall into a variety of classes, which have differing mechanisms of action. If you could mention the name of the drug, it could help clear things up.

You should discuss any discomfort you feel with your pharmacist and clinician.

ScumLord

I had to stop taking the anti-depressents the doc gave me, they just made me worse. I was getting into a good exercise programme feeling better but wanted to get over the depression once and for all so went to the doctor. I wanted counseling but instead got sent to a drug addiction counselor!!

I felt terrible on the meds (sanex or someit there called) no energy, tired all the time couldn't muster up the energy to do anything which made me feel worse because I couldn't exercise and started missing work. I told them this and there solution was to up the dose!!

I didn't tell them I stopped taking them because I'm afraid they'd just put me on something else, I'm just going along with it so I can get the counseling.

The hole experience is putting me off trying to get help at all.

virtus

N8 wrote: »

Yes get right back on track with some more medication that will affect your concentration, co-ordination and memory! It may also have the uncommon but not rare side effect of psychosis, suicidal thoughts, violent and aggressive behaviour and the lesser known effects of increased diabetes risk and the kicker– a reduced sperm count!

Good answer but either disingenuous or not fully informed perhaps give this website a visit: http://www.alliance-natural-health.org/

St. John's Wort is effective in treating depression. It is a medicinal herb frequently blamed for interfering with prescription drugs, but don’t antidepressants also affect and interact with other prescriptive drugs?

May by crossing the border into N.Ireland this helps the body reduce this interaction in some mysterious manner unknown yet to science?

Its ban in Ireland is part and parcel of the global vitamin and supplement ban being pushed by pharmaceutical companies under CODEX regulations, which will have the effect essentially of outlawing any food, herb or natural substance that actually promotes health.

St. Johns Wort acts as an inhibitor of the CYP3A4 enzyme involved in metabolism (The extent of induction of CYP3A by St. John’s wort varies among products and is linked to hyperforin dose, Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 62 (2006), pp. 29–36.). The CYP3A4 enzyme is involved in the metabolism of around 60% of prescription drugs (Role of cytochrome P450 enzymes in drug–drug interactions, Drug–Drug Interactions: Scientific and Regulatory Perspectives, Academic Press, San Diego (1997) pp. 7–35.).

Do you think it would be wise to allow such a medicinal herbal product to be freely available over the counter?

Regulation of herbal medicinal products is not intended to be a money making exercise. Such products are inherently variable due different phenotypes, time of harvesting, not to mention the problem posed by harvesting, drying and storage. Regulation ensures quality, safety and uniformity of content wouldnt you agree?

N8

virtus wrote: »

Do you think it would be wise to allow such a medicinal herbal product to be freely available over the counter?

Big Brother allows people to buy cigarettes…. Need I say more? Need we examine the issue of free choice?

virtus wrote: »

Regulation ensures quality, safety and uniformity of content wouldnt you agree?

Regulation did not ensure quality, safety and uniformity of content; it ensured a blanket ban of St John’s Wort amongst other things.

virtus

N8 wrote: »

Big Brother allows people to buy cigarettes…. Need I say more? Need we examine the issue of free choice?

Touché

tallaght01

N8 wrote: »

Big Brother allows people to buy cigarettes…. Need I say more? Need we examine the issue of free choice?



QUOTE]

Cigarettes aren't marketed as being good for you though :P

N8

couldn't resist...

Bethany

I think it is fair to say that no matter what arguements are put, N8 will remain absolute in his/her certainties. It's a democracy thankfully and he/she has the right to express them ; equally we have the right to reject them and express fear that others might actually be influenced by said opinions.

The joys of the internet!!!!

nursetinkerbell

I myself was on Effexor for 7mths this yr, from xmas 06 until July 2007, and I found it very hard to concentrate, I was constantly tired all the time, missing classes, it was horrible, but since iv come off them, im perfect again!!!!

Bethany

Nursetinkerbell, delighted to hear that you are feeling well and off your antidepressants but that fact does not substantiate any causal effect between the two. You may have benefited greatly from the antidepressant and that is why you feel well. You may not have needed that dosage, and maybe what you had was not depression. Whilst I believe that we in this world are all too quick to want pharmaceutical solutions to what in poorer societies would be regarded as life's viscissitudes, I have to say that I think that for some people antidepressants are literally a life line and allow them a quality of life that was unimaginable for someone with severe depression thirty or forty years ago. So maybe the problem is not so much with the medication but with the way it is perhaps too commonly prescribed and wanted.