Re: Paxil / Seroxat Lawsuit

[Guest guest]

Dear your comments on this matter are most interesting and

timely.

you said " And here is where a written warning about suicide on all

these drugs

> will also interfere in people's ability to bring

lawsuits. ........ "

" This is the work of the pharmaceutical industry. They WANTED to be

asked

> to do this. ......... "

_________________________________________________

THIS LISTS attention is drawn to the following URL from the BBC, a

reliable source of news and opinion.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2635181.stm

I draw your attention to the following lines submitted by the list

owner & web master of a SSRI drug user group based in the UK

(spokesperson) who has been taking

Seroxat for five years .........said

" we are hoping that it (review) will make more information

available ....... "

" " .. she(spokesperson) said she did not want to see the drug

(Seroxat)banned. "

" It (Seroxat)does help a lot of people,................. "

" (members) some of whom are involved in legal action calling for

improved patient information............ "

AS YOU SAID " (info) will also interfere in people's

ability to bring lawsuits. ........ "

" They had to make it look like they were being forced into it.

Who the hell would buy a drug that the maker itself warns of

suicide as a

possible " adverse effect " ? This way, they get to continue to say

it's not

true but they will cooperate with the FDA's request. Aren't they

nice! .............. "

" Aren't they nice! .............. " !!!!!!!!!!!

I am just real glad that there are good folks & true here at

W & R@yahoo groups who have the knowledge & experience to re create

mental health wellness and stability.

A lot of folks have been let down by the Pharma Co's, let down by

their Doctors ..............now I fear they are going to be let down

by the Lawyers eager to parly with the drug companies & drug

regulators in concocting SOFT LET DOWN clauses.

Still the gift of life a'new resides here .........and that is

something money can't buy.

55 weeks clean

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2635181.stm

Wednesday, 8 January, 2003, 00:23 GMT

Anti-depressant safety reviewed

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2635181.stm

____ " Patient information leaflets need to be updated. ..... "

_____ " It does help a lot of people, so we are not looking for a ban,

but we do want better information. "

Prozac - one of the drugs being reviewed

Experts are looking at the safety of widely used antidepressants

including Prozac and Seroxat.

The review will look at a range of options, including whether the

drugs should be banned.

The government review began after members of the public and doctors

raised concerns that the drugs can be addictive, contrary to

manufacturers' claims - and increase the risk of suicide in some

patients.

Prozac (fluoxetine) and Seroxat (paroxetine) are drugs called

selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.

We're not sure what this review is going to achieve

Venn, Seroxat User Group

Their selling point was that people are not supposed to become

physically dependent on them, unlike older drugs.

They will be considered, along with other SSRIs, fluvoxamine,

sertraline and citalopram.

Public concern

The review is being led by Professor Angus Mackay, Director of

Mental Health Services in Lomond and Argyll, Scotland.

It will look at drug trials and reports of adverse drug reactions

made to the Committee on Safety of Medicines and the Medicines

Control Agency.

The group will report to the CSM later this month. The CSM will then

make its recommendations.

A spokesman for the Medicines Control Agency told BBC News

Online: " They are looking at this because of the media attention

that SSRIs have received, and because of concerns from the public

and also from clinicians.

" They might say that all the safety requirements are in place, or

they might say the drugs have got to be banned, though that's

unlikely. "

Information

Venn, a spokeswoman for the Seroxat User Group which supports

people using the drug, told BBC News Online: " We're not sure what

this review is going to achieve.

" But we are hoping that it will make more information available to

doctors and patients so they can make informed decisions about

taking Seroxat. "

Ms Venn, who has been taking Seroxat for five years and who is

trying to come off the drug, added: " Patient information leaflets

need to be updated.

" It's important that it makes clear how difficult withdrawal is. "

But she said she did not want to see the drug banned.

" It does help a lot of people, so we are not looking for a ban, but

we do want better information. "

The Seroxat User Group has over 4,000 members, some of whom are

involved in legal action calling for improved patient information.

GlaxoKline, the company which manufacturers Seroxat, has denied

that it can lead to addiction or that it is responsible for violence

in users.

> Glitter said:

>

>

> <<Here's what I think has happened. After the first lawsuit in

2000, which

> I participated in by providing a ten-page declaration outlining the

> withdrawal I suffered, GSK gave in and reluctantly labeled their

drug Paxil

> with " discontinuation syndrome. " I think that went into effect in

2001

> (can't really remember), so all the people who started the drug

AFTER that

> date and who then suffered withdrawals, had a hard time getting in

on the

> lawsuits because the warning label (watered down though it was)

appeared on

> the PIL. >>

>

>

> ** And here is where a written warning about suicide on all

these drugs

> will also interfere in people's ability to bring lawsuits. After

all, they

> were " warned " .

>

>

> This is the work of the pharmaceutical industry. They WANTED to

be asked

> to do this. They had to make it look like they were being forced

into it.

> Who the hell would buy a drug that the maker itself warns of

suicide as a

> possible " adverse effect " ? This way, they get to continue to say

it's not

> true but they will cooperate with the FDA's request. Aren't they

nice!

>

>

> Do you know who orchestrated it and made it happen making it look

like irate

> parents? Marks, MD did. He used these people to make it

so that the

> drug industry could continue to harm and kill people with these

drugs. He

> made a very strong point that his seminars were all about calling

for

> stronger " warnings " on these drugs. How many lives do you

suppose this

> will save?? This is like saying that getting hit by a truck can

kill you

> and then sending to out to walk back and forth across an eight

lane highway.

>

>

> I hope the rat bastard and/or his cronies are here reading

this. He's

> already blatantly lied twice to me and been caught at it.

caught him

> in a lie, too. Funny how he never respondsed to the documentation

that

> proved he was lying. I hope he's stupid enough to try it again.

>

>

> Fueled by the flu,

>

[Guest guest]

I agree entirely with re. psychiatrists. One last week

told me that what I needed was some venlafaxine to 'sort me out'.

(as bad if not worse than seroxat for withdrawal). At least my

family GP has now after years of denial accepted that there is a

problem and is spending a lot of time educating herself on the issue.

(ALthough she has obviously made mistakes re. SSRI's I very much

admire her for admitting her lack of knowledge, stepping back and

finding out as much as she can.)

My own view is that I would be very suprised if the drug companies

havent come up with some kind of antedote to withdrawal (or at least

done some research into it) but that they have been advised by

lawyers not to make these public - because to do that would be to

admit some kind of liability.

Sorry - rant over.

Sallyx

> Dear Ros,

>

>

>

> You said:

>

>

> <<I think it was a rather clever marketing strategy to make a drug

derived

> from the most addictive substance on earth, claim it is NON-habit

forming,

> and get most of its users hooked for life. The fact that some

people can

> NEVER get off this drug because of the horrific withdrawals speaks

for

> itself.>>

>

>

> ** Don't doubt it for a moment. Animal studies showed them how

dependent

> the chemistry becomes on Paxil and other drugs. They didn't waste

a moment

> seeing an opportunity.

>

>

> You said:

>

> <<What i find sad is that we are the only people that know what

it's like

> to go through it.The medical profession have no clue what the hell

they are

> giving to people.These drugs should never have been allowed to be

given out

> by family doctors.>>

>

> * This is what I call a red herring argument. It argues that

> psychiatrists, not family doctors should be prescribing these drugs

when in

> reality, is the drug any different in the hands of psychiatrists?

No, it

> isn't. The outcome will be the same. The " red herring " is that it

takes

> the attention off the drugs and places it on the " damned doctors

who don't

> know what they're doing " .

>

>

> Those who think psychiatrists know more about these drugs are

those who

> don't realize that there is no more to be known about them . Until

science

> knows more about the brain these drugs are a mystery in everyone's

hands

> except those who have taken them and know the horror of them. A

> psychiatrist is more apt to prescribe more than one psychotropic

drugs and

> in higher amounts than is a family practitioner.

>

>

> The real problem is physicians are listening to the lies of tthe

drug

> cos. instead of listening to patients. As long as they trust the

drug

> industry you'll see little progress in how physicians think about

these

> drugs. Even reading the articles about how those conducting trials

and

> research have to sign that they will not reveal any negative data

does not

> get through their thick skulls and make them realize that they

cannot trust

> the infomation they are given and is published in medical journals.

>

>

>

> You said

>

>

>

> <<I keep thinking were the extended release formula brought out

because some

> of us were willing to fight for our lives through withdrawal and

they pushed

> the goal post further in hope that we couldn't work it out.>>

>

>

> ** Absolutely. There's no doubt at all in my mind.

>

> Regards,

>

[Guest guest]

Sally

I'm glad you did not swallow the

" you need some venlafaxine Effexor ...to sort you out "

line

Well done you are winning.

> > Dear Ros,

> >

> >

> >

> > You said:

> >

> >

> > <<I think it was a rather clever marketing strategy to make a

drug

> derived

> > from the most addictive substance on earth, claim it is NON-

habit

> forming,

> > and get most of its users hooked for life. The fact that some

> people can

> > NEVER get off this drug because of the horrific withdrawals

speaks

> for

> > itself.>>

> >

> >

> > ** Don't doubt it for a moment. Animal studies showed them

how

> dependent

> > the chemistry becomes on Paxil and other drugs. They didn't

waste

> a moment

> > seeing an opportunity.

> >

> >

> > You said:

> >

> > <<What i find sad is that we are the only people that know what

> it's like

> > to go through it.The medical profession have no clue what the

hell

> they are

> > giving to people.These drugs should never have been allowed to

be

> given out

> > by family doctors.>>

> >

> > * This is what I call a red herring argument. It argues that

> > psychiatrists, not family doctors should be prescribing these

drugs

> when in

> > reality, is the drug any different in the hands of

psychiatrists?

> No, it

> > isn't. The outcome will be the same. The " red herring " is that

it

> takes

> > the attention off the drugs and places it on the " damned doctors

> who don't

> > know what they're doing " .

> >

> >

> > Those who think psychiatrists know more about these drugs are

> those who

> > don't realize that there is no more to be known about them .

Until

> science

> > knows more about the brain these drugs are a mystery in

everyone's

> hands

> > except those who have taken them and know the horror of them. A

> > psychiatrist is more apt to prescribe more than one psychotropic

> drugs and

> > in higher amounts than is a family practitioner.

> >

> >

> > The real problem is physicians are listening to the lies of

tthe

> drug

> > cos. instead of listening to patients. As long as they trust

the

> drug

> > industry you'll see little progress in how physicians think

about

> these

> > drugs. Even reading the articles about how those conducting

trials

> and

> > research have to sign that they will not reveal any negative

data

> does not

> > get through their thick skulls and make them realize that they

> cannot trust

> > the infomation they are given and is published in medical

journals.

> >

> >

> >

> > You said

> >

> >

> >

> > <<I keep thinking were the extended release formula brought out

> because some

> > of us were willing to fight for our lives through withdrawal and

> they pushed

> > the goal post further in hope that we couldn't work it out.>>

> >

> >

> > ** Absolutely. There's no doubt at all in my mind.

> >

> > Regards,

> >