Behshad wrote:More info for Dr PeePee
Antidepressants include a class of drugs known as Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors or “SSRIs,” such as fluoxetine (Prozac), manufactured by Eli Lilly and Company, sertraline (Zoloft), manufactured by Pfizer, escitalopram (Lexapro) and citalopram (Celexa) manufactured by Forest Labs. Antidepressants also include a class of drugs known as Serotonin-Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitors or "SNRIs" such as venlafaxine hydrochloride (Effexor), manufactured by Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and duloxetine hydrochloride (Cymbalta) manufactured by Eli Lilly and Company.
Although each of these SSRI manufacturers admit they do not know how their respective drugs work, each claim that they help to correct a “chemical imbalance of the brain.” The assumption for each of these drugs is that if a person is depressed (each and every depressed person), there is a reduced level of the neurotransmitter serotonin in their brains. As one well-known psychiatrist put it: “[SSRIs] are not correcting a biochemical imbalance, these drugs create severe imbalances in the brain. ... The idea that human suffering, psychological suffering, is biochemical is strictly a promotional campaign, perhaps the most successful in the history of the world, created by the drug companies. We do not even have a technology, a scientific technology, for measuring what happens inside the brain ... it is literally a fabrication."
Jesus in heaven; didn't I tell you not to reply?
I'd ask for a link to your "study" but I won't cause I know where you got that crap from. That's the one study that almost every doctor in the world have called a crappy meta study. Here's a few quotes for you, Sherminator:
Eli Lilly and Company responded by highlighting that the study did not take into account more recent studies on its product, Prozac, and that it was proud of the difference Prozac has made to millions of people. GlaxoSmithKline warned that this one study should not be used to cause unnecessary alarm and concern for patients. Wyeth pointed out that the data were good enough for FDA approval of the drugs.[80] Two leading UK psychiatrists/pharmacologists, with financial and professional links to pharmaceutical companies, argued that short-term approval trials are not very suitable for evaluating effectiveness, that the unpublished ones are poorer quality, that the meta-analysis authors came from a "psychology background" rather than drug testing background, and that the media and "elements of the medico/scientific community" have "a down on antidepressants" and that the media does not appreciate the seriousness of depression and blames and stigmatizes sufferers in a manner rooted in medieval religious attitudes.
A review of every clinical study on the effectiveness of anti depressants said:
After 3 months of treatment, the proportions of people with depression who will be much improved are:
50% and 65% if given an antidepressant
compared with
25 - 30% if given an inactive "dummy" pill, or placebo.
There you go, skipper. Now go to the mirror, please.
