Guest guest Posted April 18, 2001 Report Share Posted April 18, 2001 Hi Joan For St 's Wort, look at this: St. 's Wort Ineffective on Depression By ABC NEWS http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/abc/20010418/ts/stjohnswort010417_1.html Ususal caveat: Im not a doctor, just play one on the internet, etc. Coming off Prozac ought to be very easy. It has a long half life in the body, so that it tapers off pretty naturally. Unless your friend has been on a very high dose a very long time he's unlikely to have a problem coming off. St 's Wort is usually well tolerated by ppl but as it doesnt appear to do anything is not worth it, and probably wouldnt help come off Prozac in any case. He should talk with his doc but if he's on the usual 20mg dose he could probaly stop straight away without any problems at all. P. > Does anyone know where on the web to find information about getting > off Prozac? I have a friend who has been taking it for a number of > years. He will see his doctor, I'm sure, but he is interested in > being as informed as possible before doing so. So many doctors just > hand it out like candy,and, although he doesn't feel depressed or in > any danger of becoming so, his doctor has discouraged him from > stopping the medication before. Also, is anyone aware of any studies > or information on the effectiveness or dangers of taking St. 's > Wort? I don't usually buy into most of that herbal stuff, but I did > take St. 's Wort once, and I had the same horrible reaction to it > that I did to Prozac. I was completely wired. Perhaps this was just a > Placebo effect, I don't know. My friend has not experienced the > negative side effects to Prozac that I did and is considering the > herbal supplement as an intermediate to taking nothing. Kind of like > methadone, I guess. Anyway, I told him I'd see what I could find out. > > Joan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2001 Report Share Posted April 18, 2001 Of course this " study " was funded by Pfizer,maker of Zoloft. Re: Getting Off Prozac > Hi Joan > > For St 's Wort, look at this: > > St. 's Wort Ineffective on Depression > By ABC NEWS > http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/abc/20010418/ts/stjohnswort010417_1.html > > Ususal caveat: Im not a doctor, just play one on the internet, etc. > > Coming off Prozac ought to be very easy. It has a long half life in > the body, so that it tapers off pretty naturally. Unless your friend > has been on a very high dose a very long time he's unlikely to have a > problem coming off. St 's Wort is usually well tolerated by ppl > but as it doesnt appear to do anything is not worth it, and probably > wouldnt help come off Prozac in any case. He should talk with his doc > but if he's on the usual 20mg dose he could probaly stop straight away > without any problems at all. > > P. > > > > Does anyone know where on the web to find information about getting > > off Prozac? I have a friend who has been taking it for a number of > > years. He will see his doctor, I'm sure, but he is interested in > > being as informed as possible before doing so. So many doctors just > > hand it out like candy,and, although he doesn't feel depressed or in > > any danger of becoming so, his doctor has discouraged him from > > stopping the medication before. Also, is anyone aware of any studies > > or information on the effectiveness or dangers of taking St. 's > > Wort? I don't usually buy into most of that herbal stuff, but I did > > take St. 's Wort once, and I had the same horrible reaction to > it > > that I did to Prozac. I was completely wired. Perhaps this was just > a > > Placebo effect, I don't know. My friend has not experienced the > > negative side effects to Prozac that I did and is considering the > > herbal supplement as an intermediate to taking nothing. Kind of like > > methadone, I guess. Anyway, I told him I'd see what I could find > out. > > > > Joan > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2001 Report Share Posted April 19, 2001 Breggin is a med-skeptic and gives an extreme viewpoint that is not the general consensus of psychiatry, and should be viewed in that light. You might as well get advice off Szasz. Actually, I believe Szaz' views hold a great deal of merit. The only thing that gives me pause is my brother's behavior. He's been diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic for some 20 years, and god knows that when he isn't on his meds he is scary. I don't believe I am "mentally ill." Nature simply gave me an unfortunately low stress threshold. It truly makes no difference to me whether this fact is considered a "medical problem" or simply a variation of a normal human condition on a low end of the spectrum. Either way, I choose not to exist in that condition as long as there are relatively innocuous chemicals I can ingest that make it far more bearable. For good or for ill, under the current regime the only way I can obtain these chemicals is to procure a scrip from a shrink. So that's what I do. --Mona-- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2001 Report Share Posted April 19, 2001 My question is, if psychiatric drugs effect cognitive abilitities, cause adverse reactions when abrubtly halted, and change one's mood when injested, why are they not considered to be addictive? I think they may well be addictive, insofar as they must be tapered off to avoid unpleasant side effects. However, not only have I NOT noticed that the two medications I take impair my cognitive abilities, I positively find that my mental acuity is stronger and more steady than when I do not take them. One of these meds, Neurontin, was originally introduced for epileptics as an anti-convulsant, and I am aware of no reports that it impairs the cognition of the epileptics who take it. --Mona-- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2001 Report Share Posted April 19, 2001 Hi Mona A measure of how bad I am off meds at the moment is that I am less able to fully endorse what you say and give appropriate resonses to med-skeptics and herb-proponents. I must see my doc soon and go bck on an approporate med. Paxil usually gives ppl few problems but I know from experience can be hard to come off. Since I'm not at my best I will simply say here: Breggin is a med-skeptic and gives an extreme viewpoint that is not the general consensus of psychiatry, and should be viewed in that light. You might as well get advice off Szasz. The St 's Wort " Study " , even when put in quotes, will nevertheless be a quality methodoligical study performed to a high standard, with original data sets made available and peer reviewed - suggestions of bias because it is sponsored are just scare tactics. These studies are being done in order that companies might market the active ingredient, so if a positive result is shown then the skeptics will berate then for that reason instead. It is vastly more credible a soure of information than the kaftan beads and sandals brigade deciding that SJW has its place along with nice smelling stuff (aromatherapy), inert pills or water (homeopathy) or sticking needles in completely irrelevant parts of the body (accupuncture). Psychological unpleasant effects from drugs are called " nocebo effects " and are very common, as are of course, physical ones. The study merely suggests there is no above-placebo *anti-depressant* effect of SJW, not that it might produce genuine unpleasant side effects! In fact, SJW was already known to have adverse reactions, and this may actually explain why it has been thought to be an antidepressant. Positive psychological reponses, i.e. the placebo effect, occur more strongly is the treatment cuses pain or discomfort. Hence, if SJW has an upleasant effect like insomnia ppl will tend to report that that they are less depressed too. Since depressed ppl fell self-aversion, then the adverse reactions may psychologically finction as a " punishment " tha relieves their sense of guilt and hence raises their mood. In *general* this response to side-effects is called the " active placebo " effect, and hence drugs are often tested against existing drugs in clinical trials to allow for this, as well as inert placebos. Best, P. > In a message dated 4/19/01 7:28:51 AM US Eastern Standard Time, > CATSJP1000@a... writes: > > > > Its my understanding that SSRIs should not be stopped abruptly but be > > tapered > > off . > > This is the word from my British National Formulary . > > SSRIS ( Prozac is one ) Abrupt withdrawal should be avoided (associated > > with > > headaches ,nausea , parasthesia , dizziness and anxiety ). > > > > That's all true in my experience with Paxil, which I still take. Anyone who > wants information and exchanges with others who take meds for anxiety and > depression could check out about.anxiety/depression.com. (Go to about.com > and click on letter " A " and locate anxiety forum.) There I encountered > discussions about Paxil by other consumers, which I found useful. > > Myself, I have found Paxil and Neurontin to be incredibly life-saving and > -enhancing. Since childhood I have been afflicted with inordinate levels of > anxiety, which pissed me off and made me feel like I was some sort of wuss > and sicko. I KNEW it was not normal to get as bent out of shape as I did > over some things, and couldn't figure out what the f*ck was wrong with me. > > When a series of extremely traumatic events hit me all at once in 1997, my > self-medication with alcohol went WAY out of control. With my meds, I feel > almost no desire to drink, and have a life. > > --Mona-- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2001 Report Share Posted April 19, 2001 Sorry, I forgot. Dorothy Rowe, one of the foremost psychologists in hte Uk, writes a foreward for Dr. breggin's book, Toxic Psychiatry, and endorses him heartily. >From: watts_pete@... >Reply-To: 12-step-free >To: 12-step-free >Subject: Re: Getting Off Prozac >Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 17:44:25 -0000 > >Hi Mona > >A measure of how bad I am off meds at the moment is that I am less >able to fully endorse what you say and give appropriate resonses to >med-skeptics and herb-proponents. I must see my doc soon and go bck >on an approporate med. Paxil usually gives ppl few problems but I >know from experience can be hard to come off. > >Since I'm not at my best I will simply say here: > >Breggin is a med-skeptic and gives an extreme viewpoint that is not >the general consensus of psychiatry, and should be viewed in that >light. You might as well get advice off Szasz. > >The St 's Wort " Study " , even when put in quotes, will nevertheless >be a quality methodoligical study performed to a high standard, with >original data sets made available and peer reviewed - suggestions of >bias because it is sponsored are just scare tactics. These studies >are being done in order that companies might market the active >ingredient, so if a positive result is shown then the skeptics will >berate then for that reason instead. It is vastly more credible a >soure of information than the kaftan beads and sandals brigade >deciding that SJW has its place along with nice smelling stuff >(aromatherapy), inert pills or water (homeopathy) or sticking needles >in completely irrelevant parts of the body (accupuncture). > >Psychological unpleasant effects from drugs are called " nocebo >effects " and are very common, as are of course, physical ones. The >study merely suggests there is no above-placebo *anti-depressant* >effect of SJW, not that it might produce genuine unpleasant side >effects! In fact, SJW was already known to have adverse reactions, >and this may actually explain why it has been thought to be an >antidepressant. Positive psychological reponses, i.e. the placebo >effect, occur more strongly is the treatment cuses pain or discomfort. >Hence, if SJW has an upleasant effect like insomnia ppl will tend to >report that that they are less depressed too. Since depressed ppl >fell self-aversion, then the adverse reactions may psychologically >finction as a " punishment " tha relieves their sense of guilt and hence >raises their mood. In *general* this response to side-effects is >called the " active placebo " effect, and hence drugs are often tested >against existing drugs in clinical trials to allow for this, as well >as inert placebos. > >Best, >P. > > > > In a message dated 4/19/01 7:28:51 AM US Eastern Standard Time, > > CATSJP1000@a... writes: > > > > > > > Its my understanding that SSRIs should not be stopped abruptly but >be > > > tapered > > > off . > > > This is the word from my British National Formulary . > > > SSRIS ( Prozac is one ) Abrupt withdrawal should be avoided >(associated > > > with > > > headaches ,nausea , parasthesia , dizziness and anxiety ). > > > > > > > That's all true in my experience with Paxil, which I still take. >Anyone who > > wants information and exchanges with others who take meds for >anxiety and > > depression could check out about.anxiety/depression.com. (Go to >about.com > > and click on letter " A " and locate anxiety forum.) There I >encountered > > discussions about Paxil by other consumers, which I found useful. > > > > Myself, I have found Paxil and Neurontin to be incredibly >life-saving and > > -enhancing. Since childhood I have been afflicted with inordinate >levels of > > anxiety, which pissed me off and made me feel like I was some sort >of wuss > > and sicko. I KNEW it was not normal to get as bent out of shape as >I did > > over some things, and couldn't figure out what the f*ck was wrong >with me. > > > > When a series of extremely traumatic events hit me all at once in >1997, my > > self-medication with alcohol went WAY out of control. With my meds, >I feel > > almost no desire to drink, and have a life. > > > > --Mona-- > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2001 Report Share Posted April 19, 2001 Sorry, I forgot. Dorothy Rowe, one of the foremost psychologists in hte Uk, writes a foreward for Dr. breggin's book, Toxic Psychiatry, and endorses him heartily. >From: watts_pete@... >Reply-To: 12-step-free >To: 12-step-free >Subject: Re: Getting Off Prozac >Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 17:44:25 -0000 > >Hi Mona > >A measure of how bad I am off meds at the moment is that I am less >able to fully endorse what you say and give appropriate resonses to >med-skeptics and herb-proponents. I must see my doc soon and go bck >on an approporate med. Paxil usually gives ppl few problems but I >know from experience can be hard to come off. > >Since I'm not at my best I will simply say here: > >Breggin is a med-skeptic and gives an extreme viewpoint that is not >the general consensus of psychiatry, and should be viewed in that >light. You might as well get advice off Szasz. > >The St 's Wort " Study " , even when put in quotes, will nevertheless >be a quality methodoligical study performed to a high standard, with >original data sets made available and peer reviewed - suggestions of >bias because it is sponsored are just scare tactics. These studies >are being done in order that companies might market the active >ingredient, so if a positive result is shown then the skeptics will >berate then for that reason instead. It is vastly more credible a >soure of information than the kaftan beads and sandals brigade >deciding that SJW has its place along with nice smelling stuff >(aromatherapy), inert pills or water (homeopathy) or sticking needles >in completely irrelevant parts of the body (accupuncture). > >Psychological unpleasant effects from drugs are called " nocebo >effects " and are very common, as are of course, physical ones. The >study merely suggests there is no above-placebo *anti-depressant* >effect of SJW, not that it might produce genuine unpleasant side >effects! In fact, SJW was already known to have adverse reactions, >and this may actually explain why it has been thought to be an >antidepressant. Positive psychological reponses, i.e. the placebo >effect, occur more strongly is the treatment cuses pain or discomfort. >Hence, if SJW has an upleasant effect like insomnia ppl will tend to >report that that they are less depressed too. Since depressed ppl >fell self-aversion, then the adverse reactions may psychologically >finction as a " punishment " tha relieves their sense of guilt and hence >raises their mood. In *general* this response to side-effects is >called the " active placebo " effect, and hence drugs are often tested >against existing drugs in clinical trials to allow for this, as well >as inert placebos. > >Best, >P. > > > > In a message dated 4/19/01 7:28:51 AM US Eastern Standard Time, > > CATSJP1000@a... writes: > > > > > > > Its my understanding that SSRIs should not be stopped abruptly but >be > > > tapered > > > off . > > > This is the word from my British National Formulary . > > > SSRIS ( Prozac is one ) Abrupt withdrawal should be avoided >(associated > > > with > > > headaches ,nausea , parasthesia , dizziness and anxiety ). > > > > > > > That's all true in my experience with Paxil, which I still take. >Anyone who > > wants information and exchanges with others who take meds for >anxiety and > > depression could check out about.anxiety/depression.com. (Go to >about.com > > and click on letter " A " and locate anxiety forum.) There I >encountered > > discussions about Paxil by other consumers, which I found useful. > > > > Myself, I have found Paxil and Neurontin to be incredibly >life-saving and > > -enhancing. Since childhood I have been afflicted with inordinate >levels of > > anxiety, which pissed me off and made me feel like I was some sort >of wuss > > and sicko. I KNEW it was not normal to get as bent out of shape as >I did > > over some things, and couldn't figure out what the f*ck was wrong >with me. > > > > When a series of extremely traumatic events hit me all at once in >1997, my > > self-medication with alcohol went WAY out of control. With my meds, >I feel > > almost no desire to drink, and have a life. > > > > --Mona-- > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2001 Report Share Posted April 19, 2001 , >I found that all psychiatric drugs effect ones cognitive abilities >which are required to learn to deal with the circumstances in life >which >cause these negative states which human beings can get stuck in for >prolonged periods. I agree with you. My question is, if psychiatric drugs effect cognitive abilitities, cause adverse reactions when abrubtly halted, and change one's mood when injested, why are they not considered to be addictive? I mean, cocaine used to be viewed as a cure-all medicine until minorities started taking it and everybody got scared that they'd have sex with the white women, at least according to MSNBC. Why is Prozac different? Joan > > > In a message dated 4/19/01 7:28:51 AM US Eastern Standard Time, > > > CATSJP1000@a... writes: > > > > > > > > > > Its my understanding that SSRIs should not be stopped abruptly but > >be > > > > tapered > > > > off . > > > > This is the word from my British National Formulary . > > > > SSRIS ( Prozac is one ) Abrupt withdrawal should be avoided > >(associated > > > > with > > > > headaches ,nausea , parasthesia , dizziness and anxiety ). > > > > > > > > > > That's all true in my experience with Paxil, which I still take. > >Anyone who > > > wants information and exchanges with others who take meds for > >anxiety and > > > depression could check out about.anxiety/depression.com. (Go to > >about.com > > > and click on letter " A " and locate anxiety forum.) There I > >encountered > > > discussions about Paxil by other consumers, which I found useful. > > > > > > Myself, I have found Paxil and Neurontin to be incredibly > >life-saving and > > > -enhancing. Since childhood I have been afflicted with inordinate > >levels of > > > anxiety, which pissed me off and made me feel like I was some sort > >of wuss > > > and sicko. I KNEW it was not normal to get as bent out of shape as > >I did > > > over some things, and couldn't figure out what the f*ck was wrong > >with me. > > > > > > When a series of extremely traumatic events hit me all at once in > >1997, my > > > self-medication with alcohol went WAY out of control. With my meds, > >I feel > > > almost no desire to drink, and have a life. > > > > > > --Mona-- > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ ___ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2001 Report Share Posted April 19, 2001 Mona, I did not mean to suggest that all psychiatric drugs do impair cognitive ability, I was just putting a " what if " on what claimed. I don't have enough concrete information to say one way or the other. I felt as if my thinking abilities were enhanced by Prozac. The problem was that they were too enhanced. I felt like I was on speed. I'm sure it varies from person to person and from drug to drug. I'm just wondering how the label of " addictive " plays into whether people consider themselves to be addicted or feel addicted. Most psychiatric drugs are not labeled as such. Most people who take them on a regular basis do not consider themselves to be addicted. I wonder if it would be different if they were called " addictive " . And if cocaine were still considered to be a wonder drug, would people's perception of its addictive properties be different? Joan > In a message dated 4/19/01 3:14:03 PM US Eastern Standard Time, > jmere@e... writes: > > > > My question is, if psychiatric drugs effect > > cognitive abilitities, cause adverse reactions when abrubtly halted, > > and change one's mood when injested, why are they not considered to > > > > I think they may well be addictive, insofar as they must be tapered off to > avoid unpleasant side effects. However, not only have I NOT noticed that the > two medications I take impair my cognitive abilities, I positively find that > my mental acuity is stronger and more steady than when I do not take them. > One of these meds, Neurontin, was originally introduced for epileptics as an > anti-convulsant, and I am aware of no reports that it impairs the cognition > of the epileptics who take it. > > --Mona-- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2001 Report Share Posted April 21, 2001 Many psychiatric medications are indded deemed addictive. Much depends on whose research a person looks at. A lot of research money is channelled into the Industry by the Pharmaceautical Lobby and the results weighted and sometinmes altered to suit the Corporate needs at the time. Lilleys own research on Prozac was doctored and some of it repressed for over 8 years as the the negative effects it has on the life of a significant percentage of those who take it. Little money goes into research which looks into the more negative aspects of these medications. Universities tend to have funding withdrawn should they take on research deemed detrimental to their Corporate Sponsors Welfare. I, too, look on Prozac and other similar drugs as being speed like in effect. This sharpens the intellect somewhat but reduces the emotional depth of that intellect. In other words I can learn book like a lot more easily but assimilating what i read into me own emotional experinces Becomes so much harder if not impossible. Rarely do i notice efects on my cognitive abilities until some time has passed. To me this is one4 of the hidden costs that only becomes visible on hindsight and usually some years later. There are many long term effects of various psychiatric medications but due to the paucity of objective research and the suppression of negative findings by these companies it is usually years later before they become known. There have been many wonder pills over the years but all have fallen by the wayside for some reason or another. I have no axe to grind as to whether others take psychiatric medication -- that is up to them as I prefer not to given my own and my many friends experiences -- but I do urge that each look closely at the drugs they are taking and their possible effects before embarking on that course of action. I also do not think that life is about happiness all the time. Sometimes the deeper the hell I got myself into through the lack of various skills made the light required to extrciate myself from that darkness so much brighter on my passage out of the tunnel. A tunnel I may never have known should i have adopted the bio-chemical structure with which to understand my experiences. As Lynne Segal said, " I am not a prisoner of my own biology. " I believe my human potential outweighs any slight genetic or chemical difference their MAY be between myself and the large majority of my species. Goerge >From: jmere@... >Reply-To: 12-step-free >To: 12-step-free >Subject: Re: Getting Off Prozac >Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 19:27:02 -0000 > >, > > >I found that all psychiatric drugs effect ones cognitive abilities > >which are required to learn to deal with the circumstances in life > >which > >cause these negative states which human beings can get stuck in for > >prolonged periods. > >I agree with you. My question is, if psychiatric drugs effect >cognitive abilitities, cause adverse reactions when abrubtly halted, >and change one's mood when injested, why are they not considered to >be addictive? I mean, cocaine used to be viewed as a cure-all >medicine until minorities started taking it and everybody got scared >that they'd have sex with the white women, at least according to >MSNBC. Why is Prozac different? > >Joan > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 4/19/01 7:28:51 AM US Eastern Standard Time, > > > > CATSJP1000@a... writes: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Its my understanding that SSRIs should not be stopped >abruptly but > > >be > > > > > tapered > > > > > off . > > > > > This is the word from my British National Formulary . > > > > > SSRIS ( Prozac is one ) Abrupt withdrawal should be avoided > > >(associated > > > > > with > > > > > headaches ,nausea , parasthesia , dizziness and anxiety ). > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's all true in my experience with Paxil, which I still take. > > >Anyone who > > > > wants information and exchanges with others who take meds for > > >anxiety and > > > > depression could check out about.anxiety/depression.com. (Go to > > >about.com > > > > and click on letter " A " and locate anxiety forum.) There I > > >encountered > > > > discussions about Paxil by other consumers, which I found >useful. > > > > > > > > Myself, I have found Paxil and Neurontin to be incredibly > > >life-saving and > > > > -enhancing. Since childhood I have been afflicted with >inordinate > > >levels of > > > > anxiety, which pissed me off and made me feel like I was some >sort > > >of wuss > > > > and sicko. I KNEW it was not normal to get as bent out of >shape as > > >I did > > > > over some things, and couldn't figure out what the f*ck was >wrong > > >with me. > > > > > > > > When a series of extremely traumatic events hit me all at once >in > > >1997, my > > > > self-medication with alcohol went WAY out of control. With my >meds, > > >I feel > > > > almost no desire to drink, and have a life. > > > > > > > > --Mona-- > > > > > > > >______________________________________________________________________ >___ > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at >http://www.hotmail.com. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2001 Report Share Posted April 21, 2001 Lately I have come across two young people who went to see their general medical practitioner to ask for help as they were 'depressed '. Both came away with prescriptions for antidepressants and nothing else. One is a young man of 21. The doctor had told him he did not need professional counselling /therapy and should just 'talk to friends' and 'take these pills'. After half a dozen counselling sessions with me has begun his grieving process. (His father died horribly a few years ago as a result of chronic alcohol poisoning.) He is learning to allow himself to feel and express his feelings and now has no need for antidepressants. He had never in his life told anyone how he felt. (So common for boys and young men.... no wonder they kill themselves and others so often.) What sort of family of origin is it that does not allow people to express their feelings? An emotional prison. (One like mine.) He still goes on binge drinking sessions but that I am sure will ease as he learns to get in touch with his emotional life and true self. Another is a friend's daughter aged only 16. She had one professional counseling session then her separated, 'not-speaking-to-each-other- over-money' parents decided they would not afford the $90 fee. (It would eat into their own self-medication budgets no doubt.) So the pills were cheaper quicker and less demanding on them. I feel very angry about it. Sixteen! Angry both with the neglectful parents and the doctors who without any training or experience assume the right to treat 'depression' chemically. -----Original Message-----From: MonaHolland@... Sent: Friday, 20 April 2001 6:30 AMTo: 12-step-free Subject: Re: Re: Getting Off Prozac My question is, if psychiatric drugs effect cognitive abilitities, cause adverse reactions when abrubtly halted, and change one's mood when injested, why are they not considered to be addictive? I think they may well be addictive, insofar as they must be tapered off to avoid unpleasant side effects. However, not only have I NOT noticed that the two medications I take impair my cognitive abilities, I positively find that my mental acuity is stronger and more steady than when I do not take them. One of these meds, Neurontin, was originally introduced for epileptics as an anti-convulsant, and I am aware of no reports that it impairs the cognition of the epileptics who take it. --Mona-- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2001 Report Share Posted April 22, 2001 Angry both with the neglectful parents and the doctors who without any training or experience assume the right to treat 'depression' chemically. I have such mixed feelings about this issue. On the one hand, I honestly know that Paxil and Neurontin, combined with the resolve that I am now a life-long non-drinker, have given me myself and my life back. On the other, the first event that began my slide into profound depression and insane drinking levels was the death of my son. I am certain that the drugs alone would have been insufficient, and that the grief counselor I saw helped me enormously. Simply understanding the grief cycle experienced commonly by a bereaved mom helped me see that everything happening to me emotionally and physically was normal, and to have hope that the raw, intolerable pain would end at some point. Truly, I needed both the drugs and the counseling. Do you think it has to be an either or situation? --Mona-- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2001 Report Share Posted April 23, 2001 It is my understanding that the mind instructs the brain. If i enter a situation fraught with danger, for example, my mind instructs my brain to produce chemicals such as adrenaline to allow the physical response to be shaped in a certain fashion. If I then take chemicals to counter-act, in my body, the instructions of the brain i am thus not dealing with my very correct and natural response to that situation. If my situation is as such that I am getting very depressed by events in my life and i use any form of chemicals to suppress the symptoms of that depression then I am in danger of ignoring the very real life circumstances which are producing that state of mind in myself. By changing the circumstances in my life over a period of time I then alter the instructions sent to my brain by my mind. I accomplish this by deciding what is acceptable and what is not in my life, and working on changing what i can. I think it was Addler who said, " Neurosis and psychosis are modes of behaviour for human beings who have lost courage. " Utilising medications may be, in my mind, a valuable form of crisis intervention. However I compare it to having a broken leg. Crutches are useful while the damage is fresh but if i continue to use the crutches for too long then the muscles in my leg will not develop and my lameness will continue albeit in a different form. >From: MonaHolland@... >Reply-To: 12-step-free >To: 12-step-free >Subject: Re: Re: Getting Off Prozac >Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 23:48:43 EDT > >In a message dated 4/22/01 10:30:05 PM US Eastern Standard Time, >pauly@... writes: > > > > Angry both with the neglectful parents and the doctors who without any > > training or experience assume the right to treat 'depression' >chemically. > > > >I have such mixed feelings about this issue. On the one hand, I honestly >know that Paxil and Neurontin, combined with the resolve that I am now a >life-long non-drinker, have given me myself and my life back. On the >other, >the first event that began my slide into profound depression and insane >drinking levels was the death of my son. I am certain that the drugs alone >would have been insufficient, and that the grief counselor I saw helped me >enormously. Simply understanding the grief cycle experienced commonly by a >bereaved mom helped me see that everything happening to me emotionally and >physically was normal, and to have hope that the raw, intolerable pain >would >end at some point. > >Truly, I needed both the drugs and the counseling. Do you think it has to >be >an either or situation? > >--Mona-- _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2001 Report Share Posted April 23, 2001 It is my understanding that the mind instructs the brain. If i enter a situation fraught with danger, for example, my mind instructs my brain to produce chemicals such as adrenaline to allow the physical response to be shaped in a certain fashion. If I then take chemicals to counter-act, in my body, the instructions of the brain i am thus not dealing with my very correct and natural response to that situation. If my situation is as such that I am getting very depressed by events in my life and i use any form of chemicals to suppress the symptoms of that depression then I am in danger of ignoring the very real life circumstances which are producing that state of mind in myself. By changing the circumstances in my life over a period of time I then alter the instructions sent to my brain by my mind. I accomplish this by deciding what is acceptable and what is not in my life, and working on changing what i can. I think it was Addler who said, " Neurosis and psychosis are modes of behaviour for human beings who have lost courage. " Utilising medications may be, in my mind, a valuable form of crisis intervention. However I compare it to having a broken leg. Crutches are useful while the damage is fresh but if i continue to use the crutches for too long then the muscles in my leg will not develop and my lameness will continue albeit in a different form. >From: MonaHolland@... >Reply-To: 12-step-free >To: 12-step-free >Subject: Re: Re: Getting Off Prozac >Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 23:48:43 EDT > >In a message dated 4/22/01 10:30:05 PM US Eastern Standard Time, >pauly@... writes: > > > > Angry both with the neglectful parents and the doctors who without any > > training or experience assume the right to treat 'depression' >chemically. > > > >I have such mixed feelings about this issue. On the one hand, I honestly >know that Paxil and Neurontin, combined with the resolve that I am now a >life-long non-drinker, have given me myself and my life back. On the >other, >the first event that began my slide into profound depression and insane >drinking levels was the death of my son. I am certain that the drugs alone >would have been insufficient, and that the grief counselor I saw helped me >enormously. Simply understanding the grief cycle experienced commonly by a >bereaved mom helped me see that everything happening to me emotionally and >physically was normal, and to have hope that the raw, intolerable pain >would >end at some point. > >Truly, I needed both the drugs and the counseling. Do you think it has to >be >an either or situation? > >--Mona-- _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2001 Report Share Posted April 23, 2001 , The argument below is one often used and it is fallacious, since it assumes that a depressive or anxious response is the intrinsically correct one to the person's circumstances, and they often arent. A massive fever is a response of the body to an infection - and can kill. You may need to pack a fevered patient in ice to get their temperature down to save their life. Depression and anbxiety become problems precisely *when* they are largely inappropriate responses to life circumstances. Your " crutch " analogy is one that I often use myself. However, I note that its only here that you have started to use it. It is of course an analogy *supportive* of the use of meds, yet support for meds isnt exactly the impression youve been giving me. Of course they shouldnt be continued when no longer necessary, but that isnt an argument for not using them *at all*, but that was the only message I seemed to be hearing from you up to this point. Also, a completely crippled leg never heals, the crutch is always necessary - and sometimes it's like that with the brain too. Unfortunately, it just isnt as easy to tell. The out of context quote for Adler I think is awful, just another thing to make troubled ppl feel yet more ashamed of themselves. Psychosis is almost always associated with an extremely severe disruption of neurochemistry, nothing to do with " courage " at all. Many psychotic ppl show great courage. Neurochemistry also plays a big role in " neuroses " too. I actually think Adler's ideas have a lot to be said for them - but not this one. P. > It is my understanding that the mind instructs the brain. If i enter a > situation fraught with danger, for example, my mind instructs my brain to > produce chemicals such as adrenaline to allow the physical response to be > shaped in a certain fashion. If I then take chemicals to counter-act, in my > body, the instructions of the brain i am thus not dealing with my very > correct and natural response to that situation. > If my situation is as such that I am getting very depressed by events in my > life and i use any form of chemicals to suppress the symptoms of that > depression then I am in danger of ignoring the very real life circumstances > which are producing that state of mind in myself. By changing the > circumstances in my life over a period of time I then alter the > instructions sent to my brain by my mind. I accomplish this by deciding what > is acceptable and what is not in my life, and working on changing what i > can. I think it was Addler who said, " Neurosis and psychosis are modes of > behaviour for human beings who have lost courage. " > Utilising medications may be, in my mind, a valuable form of crisis > intervention. However I compare it to having a broken leg. Crutches are > useful while the damage is fresh but if i continue to use the crutches for > too long then the muscles in my leg will not develop and my lameness will > continue albeit in a different form. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2001 Report Share Posted April 24, 2001 Pete, I am amazed at the circularity of your arguments and how all are based on assumtions made by bad science and taken on as your own. No attempt was made to address the basic premise of my argument that the mind instructs the brain and all flows from there. A negative response from one person in a given situation may indeed be seen to be " innapropriate " to others but might be perfectly " appropriate " for that person given his life experiences. To lump all together under a given evaluation of what you deem to be appropriate ansd innapropriate is do to an injustice to the variety of experience that many people have. If you look back at what i actually said, I stated that " Utilising medications MAY be, in my mind, a valuable form of crisis intervention. " I specifically used the word " MAY " to indicate that i have an open mind on that area, hard as this may be, and not to indicate that it is the ONLY form of crisis intervention. A crutch can be verbal and behavioural as well as chemical in nature. Your appreciation of the semantics involved as regards Addlers statement that " Neurosis and psychosis are modes of behaviour for human beings who have lost courage " are sadly lacking. I have no intention of making " troubled people feel ashamed of themselves " as you insist. Why should i when I strongly identify with that postition being a " psychiatric survivor myself? I only state what i strongly identify with. If I tell a child that they may drown in the sea they might become temporarily upset but that warning may actually save the child from going into the sea and actually drowning and therefore the short term discomfort acts as an aid to long term benefit, or survival in this case. If people understand that it might be the lack of courage in certain situations that is the cause of much of their ongoing distress, then it gives them the options of trying a way forward that does not involve drugs of any kind, especially if drugs (alcohol in this case) underlies the crisis of " spirit " Neurochemistry, indeed, plays a large part in " neuroses " as you state but, once more, we are back to the chicken and the egg argument that you so skillfully avoided in your response to my last posting. It is still my contention that the mind instructs the brain as to what chemical levels exist in the body and the brain and it is by confronting those issues that long term relief and a life worth living will be found. I know it was a combination of emotional iliteracy, a lack of social and communication skills and a deep seated fear of most things in life which led me forcefully into alcoholism and the clutches of the psychiatric profession who subdued me for years via medications which have long since been proved as dangerous though many are still in use. I re-iterate what Lynn Segal said< " I am not a prisoner of my own biolgy. " There are, indeed, differences in the make up of the individual as regards chemistry and genetics but these are so small in miost cases as to make their effect negligible. >From: watts_pete@... >Reply-To: 12-step-free >To: 12-step-free >Subject: Re: Getting Off Prozac >Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 20:47:04 -0000 > >, > >The argument below is one often used and it is fallacious, since it >assumes that a depressive or anxious response is the intrinsically >correct one to the person's circumstances, and they often arent. A >massive fever is a response of the body to an infection - and can >kill. You may need to pack a fevered patient in ice to get their >temperature down to save their life. > >Depression and anbxiety become problems precisely *when* they are >largely inappropriate responses to life circumstances. > >Your " crutch " analogy is one that I often use myself. However, I note >that its only here that you have started to use it. It is of course >an analogy *supportive* of the use of meds, yet support for meds isnt >exactly the impression youve been giving me. Of course they shouldnt >be continued when no longer necessary, but that isnt an argument for >not using them *at all*, but that was the only message I seemed to be >hearing from you up to this point. Also, a completely crippled leg >never heals, the crutch is always necessary - and sometimes it's like >that with the brain too. Unfortunately, it just isnt as easy to tell. > >The out of context quote for Adler I think is awful, just another >thing to make troubled ppl feel yet more ashamed of themselves. >Psychosis is almost always associated with an extremely severe >disruption of neurochemistry, nothing to do with " courage " at all. >Many psychotic ppl show great courage. Neurochemistry also plays a >big role in " neuroses " too. I actually think Adler's ideas have a lot >to be said for them - but not this one. > >P. > > > > It is my understanding that the mind instructs the brain. If i enter >a > > situation fraught with danger, for example, my mind instructs my >brain to > > produce chemicals such as adrenaline to allow the physical response >to be > > shaped in a certain fashion. If I then take chemicals to >counter-act, in my > > body, the instructions of the brain i am thus not dealing with my >very > > correct and natural response to that situation. > > If my situation is as such that I am getting very depressed by >events in my > > life and i use any form of chemicals to suppress the symptoms of >that > > depression then I am in danger of ignoring the very real life >circumstances > > which are producing that state of mind in myself. By changing the > > circumstances in my life over a period of time I then alter the > > instructions sent to my brain by my mind. I accomplish this by >deciding what > > is acceptable and what is not in my life, and working on changing >what i > > can. I think it was Addler who said, " Neurosis and psychosis are >modes of > > behaviour for human beings who have lost courage. " > > Utilising medications may be, in my mind, a valuable form of >crisis > > intervention. However I compare it to having a broken leg. Crutches >are > > useful while the damage is fresh but if i continue to use the >crutches for > > too long then the muscles in my leg will not develop and my lameness >will > > continue albeit in a different form. > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2001 Report Share Posted April 24, 2001 Neurochemistry, indeed, plays a large part in "neuroses" as you state but, once more, we are back to the chicken and the egg argument that you so skillfully avoided in your response to my last posting. It is still my contention that the mind instructs the brain as to what chemical levels exist in the body and the brain and it is by confronting those issues that long term relief and a life worth living will be found. I know it was a combination of emotional iliteracy, a lack of social and communication skills and a deep seated fear of most things in life which led me forcefully into alcoholism and the clutches of the psychiatric profession who subdued me for years via medications which have long since been proved as dangerous though many are still in use. I've been following this discussion, trying to absorb the various fact claims in light of both my own experience and the information I have gleaned in reading about it. From what I have been given to understand, a rapid series of profound traumas altered the neurochemistry of my limbic system, and my amygdala (sp?) began triggering the anxiety response far too easily and sending adrenaline through my body in response to relatively minor occurrences and at an almost constant level. That explanation "feels" right to me as it describes what I was feeling quite well. Medication intervened to break this cycle and restore me to an emotional even keel so that I can take joy from life again. Previously, I was in a state of adhenoia (sp?), meaning I could not experience joy. Most definitely, alcohol greatly contributed to this anxiety and depression, altho I started the absurd level of destructive drinking in response to the unmanageable anxiety. Eventually, I spent two years in the clutches of obsessive suicidal ideation. I am now blessedly and gratefully free from that, all as a consequnce of getting sober and medication. Further, I would be as alarmed at the thought of losing my meds as I would be by someone attempting to force alcohol down my threat -- I end up profoundly unstable in either of those events. That's my take. I don't give a rat's @ss if my meds are a "crutch." I'm alive and experiencing contentment again, and don't much care how that came about, as long as it did. --Mona-- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2001 Report Share Posted April 24, 2001 Neurochemistry, indeed, plays a large part in "neuroses" as you state but, once more, we are back to the chicken and the egg argument that you so skillfully avoided in your response to my last posting. It is still my contention that the mind instructs the brain as to what chemical levels exist in the body and the brain and it is by confronting those issues that long term relief and a life worth living will be found. I know it was a combination of emotional iliteracy, a lack of social and communication skills and a deep seated fear of most things in life which led me forcefully into alcoholism and the clutches of the psychiatric profession who subdued me for years via medications which have long since been proved as dangerous though many are still in use. I've been following this discussion, trying to absorb the various fact claims in light of both my own experience and the information I have gleaned in reading about it. From what I have been given to understand, a rapid series of profound traumas altered the neurochemistry of my limbic system, and my amygdala (sp?) began triggering the anxiety response far too easily and sending adrenaline through my body in response to relatively minor occurrences and at an almost constant level. That explanation "feels" right to me as it describes what I was feeling quite well. Medication intervened to break this cycle and restore me to an emotional even keel so that I can take joy from life again. Previously, I was in a state of adhenoia (sp?), meaning I could not experience joy. Most definitely, alcohol greatly contributed to this anxiety and depression, altho I started the absurd level of destructive drinking in response to the unmanageable anxiety. Eventually, I spent two years in the clutches of obsessive suicidal ideation. I am now blessedly and gratefully free from that, all as a consequnce of getting sober and medication. Further, I would be as alarmed at the thought of losing my meds as I would be by someone attempting to force alcohol down my threat -- I end up profoundly unstable in either of those events. That's my take. I don't give a rat's @ss if my meds are a "crutch." I'm alive and experiencing contentment again, and don't much care how that came about, as long as it did. --Mona-- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2001 Report Share Posted April 24, 2001 Neurochemistry, indeed, plays a large part in "neuroses" as you state but, once more, we are back to the chicken and the egg argument that you so skillfully avoided in your response to my last posting. It is still my contention that the mind instructs the brain as to what chemical levels exist in the body and the brain and it is by confronting those issues that long term relief and a life worth living will be found. I know it was a combination of emotional iliteracy, a lack of social and communication skills and a deep seated fear of most things in life which led me forcefully into alcoholism and the clutches of the psychiatric profession who subdued me for years via medications which have long since been proved as dangerous though many are still in use. I've been following this discussion, trying to absorb the various fact claims in light of both my own experience and the information I have gleaned in reading about it. From what I have been given to understand, a rapid series of profound traumas altered the neurochemistry of my limbic system, and my amygdala (sp?) began triggering the anxiety response far too easily and sending adrenaline through my body in response to relatively minor occurrences and at an almost constant level. That explanation "feels" right to me as it describes what I was feeling quite well. Medication intervened to break this cycle and restore me to an emotional even keel so that I can take joy from life again. Previously, I was in a state of adhenoia (sp?), meaning I could not experience joy. Most definitely, alcohol greatly contributed to this anxiety and depression, altho I started the absurd level of destructive drinking in response to the unmanageable anxiety. Eventually, I spent two years in the clutches of obsessive suicidal ideation. I am now blessedly and gratefully free from that, all as a consequnce of getting sober and medication. Further, I would be as alarmed at the thought of losing my meds as I would be by someone attempting to force alcohol down my threat -- I end up profoundly unstable in either of those events. That's my take. I don't give a rat's @ss if my meds are a "crutch." I'm alive and experiencing contentment again, and don't much care how that came about, as long as it did. --Mona-- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2001 Report Share Posted April 24, 2001 I find that I often tend to fulfil what expectations i have of myself. If I expect myself to be incompetent then incompetent I will be. By raising and creating realsitic expectations of myself which I can fulfill, my self esteem and confidence increases. It took a long time and many years/experiences to reduce me to the wreck i was and it has taken just as many to produce the person I am now. In a society which demands instant results many will see the path i chose as not being the one for them and I accept this. If they choose psycho-active medications to help them through this life and are happy and content in that approach i see no need to condemn nor judge them just as i do not condemn those who may choose to use some of the elicit substances on a daily or intermittent basis. The model which I use for understanding is based in experiences which i can understand and not in scientific theory which I have to take on faith unless I spend years gaining the necessary qualifications and adopt the somewhat blinkered view that accompanies specialisation. I am just happy to debate so an all round view can be gained and choices made available to those who still struggle in mental health areas. Expectations of being happy at all times are unrealistic for myself and i find that emerging from the more difficult periods often brings me insights which I would not have had had i chosen to medicate my way through those times. >From: MonaHolland@... >Reply-To: 12-step-free >To: 12-step-free >Subject: Re: Re: Getting Off Prozac >Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 09:56:15 EDT > >In a message dated 4/24/01 4:04:52 AM US Eastern Standard Time, >Adhakan@... writes: > > > > > > Neurochemistry, indeed, plays a large part in " neuroses " as you state > > but, > > once more, we are back to the chicken and the egg argument that you so > > skillfully avoided in your response to my last posting. It is still my > > contention that the mind instructs the brain as to what chemical levels > > exist in the body and the brain and it is by confronting those issues >that > > long term relief and a life worth living will be found. I know it was a > > combination of emotional iliteracy, a lack of social and communication > > skills and a deep seated fear of most things in life which led me > > forcefully > > into alcoholism and the clutches of the psychiatric profession who > > subdued > > me for years via medications which have long since been proved as >dangerous > > though many are still in use. > > > >I've been following this discussion, trying to absorb the various fact >claims >in light of both my own experience and the information I have gleaned in >reading about it. From what I have been given to understand, a rapid >series >of profound traumas altered the neurochemistry of my limbic system, and my >amygdala (sp?) began triggering the anxiety response far too easily and >sending adrenaline through my body in response to relatively minor >occurrences and at an almost constant level. That explanation " feels " >right >to me as it describes what I was feeling quite well. > >Medication intervened to break this cycle and restore me to an emotional >even >keel so that I can take joy from life again. Previously, I was in a state >of >adhenoia (sp?), meaning I could not experience joy. > >Most definitely, alcohol greatly contributed to this anxiety and >depression, >altho I started the absurd level of destructive drinking in response to the >unmanageable anxiety. Eventually, I spent two years in the clutches of >obsessive suicidal ideation. > >I am now blessedly and gratefully free from that, all as a consequnce of >getting sober and medication. Further, I would be as alarmed at the >thought >of losing my meds as I would be by someone attempting to force alcohol down >my threat -- I end up profoundly unstable in either of those events. > >That's my take. I don't give a rat's @ss if my meds are a " crutch. " I'm >alive and experiencing contentment again, and don't much care how that came >about, as long as it did. > >--Mona-- _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2001 Report Share Posted April 24, 2001 Folks dont take antideps because they have an "expectation to be happy all the time" they take them because they want to feel like its worth staying on the f***in' planet, would you say? Yup, yup, and yup again. I was looking for absence of unremitting misery, not full-time happiness. And that's what I've got, with a good amount of happiness to boot just by delighting in feeling what I take to be "normal." --Mona-- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2001 Report Share Posted April 25, 2001 > Therefore artificial increasing the serotonine level produces a >contradiction between objective and subjective position. > > You might feel like a winner although you're not. This curbs your emotions unrealistically, and could function like something that spreads the 'disease' while removing the 'symptoms'. People close to you will not feel comfortable, while you think things are great. Therefore you could undermine your life while feeling it's marvelous. > >It's a kind of mental cortisone. I have seen this kind of argument before and I think it is largely fallacious. The link between serotonin and status almost certainly imo works in both directions, so that when a depressed person's serotonin is elevated they will tend to shift to a higher status position which will be largely accommodated by other ppl, who may actually have been made very uncomfortable by their extremely low staus behavior. Depression is *very* aversive to other ppl, which is one of the reasons why many depressed ppl become socially isolated either through their own or others reaction to their depression. High status primates are generally not violent and maintain authority largely as a result of being able to forge succesful alliances with weaker individuals who neverthelss could overthrow them collectively. Hence *assertive* behavior, which is about obtaining one's goals within a sociually responsible framework, is quite different from aggressive behavior and is generally accommodated by all but fairly disturbed individuals. I have my own little theory about the kind of interpersonal styles that crudely might be asociated with serotonin levels: High: Assertive behavior. Goal seeking is socially acceptable, and negotiated with recognition of needs and rights of others. Person is confidednt and has little anxiety. Low: Aggression. Goal seeking is attempted by force, threats, etc. Only ceases if no longer needed or if fails and does not recognise needs/rights of others. Mood may be good and anxiety low when succesful, but may be associated with some depression and anxiety. V Low: Passive Aggression. Goal seeking is superficially tailored to accommodate more powerful individuals but they are resisted in a passive-aggressive fashion; lies, deception, sarcasm, sloth, carelessness, theft, suicidality or para-suicidality which may be exploited for emotional blackmail. Frequently depressed and anxious - may be overtly aggressive against lower status individuals or with a sudden switch in balance of power. Extremely Low: Passivity. Goal seeking is almost abandoned or limited to meeting only v basic biological needs, often through ineffective methods such as begging or living off refuse; even this may be abandoned. Individual is totally pushed around by others without any resistance at all. Extreme depression and anxiety, and May become terminal as becomes burnt out through chronic anxiety. Apparently in the death camps some individuals developed an invariably fatal condition that was called " Mussulman " which was like this - where there was little or no attempt to resist beatings and they could be beaten to death for refusing to leave their bunks. This is a gross over-simplification and most individuals switch continually between the different behaviors even if they specialise in a particular one. Also serotnin worlks i na very comples way and different serotnergic pathways have very different effects, which is why Prozac and Paxil, both SSRIs, can have very different effects. A problem with raising the serotonin levels of a very depressed person is that they may show problematic behaviors like Aggression, anxiety, and passive aggression which they did *not* previously show, and they may need to be titrated upwards very carefully to allow them and their peer group to adjust. apparently some individuals can titrate Prozac up very slowly by taking it in liquid form. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2001 Report Share Posted April 25, 2001 > Therefore artificial increasing the serotonine level produces a >contradiction between objective and subjective position. > > You might feel like a winner although you're not. This curbs your emotions unrealistically, and could function like something that spreads the 'disease' while removing the 'symptoms'. People close to you will not feel comfortable, while you think things are great. Therefore you could undermine your life while feeling it's marvelous. > >It's a kind of mental cortisone. I have seen this kind of argument before and I think it is largely fallacious. The link between serotonin and status almost certainly imo works in both directions, so that when a depressed person's serotonin is elevated they will tend to shift to a higher status position which will be largely accommodated by other ppl, who may actually have been made very uncomfortable by their extremely low staus behavior. Depression is *very* aversive to other ppl, which is one of the reasons why many depressed ppl become socially isolated either through their own or others reaction to their depression. High status primates are generally not violent and maintain authority largely as a result of being able to forge succesful alliances with weaker individuals who neverthelss could overthrow them collectively. Hence *assertive* behavior, which is about obtaining one's goals within a sociually responsible framework, is quite different from aggressive behavior and is generally accommodated by all but fairly disturbed individuals. I have my own little theory about the kind of interpersonal styles that crudely might be asociated with serotonin levels: High: Assertive behavior. Goal seeking is socially acceptable, and negotiated with recognition of needs and rights of others. Person is confidednt and has little anxiety. Low: Aggression. Goal seeking is attempted by force, threats, etc. Only ceases if no longer needed or if fails and does not recognise needs/rights of others. Mood may be good and anxiety low when succesful, but may be associated with some depression and anxiety. V Low: Passive Aggression. Goal seeking is superficially tailored to accommodate more powerful individuals but they are resisted in a passive-aggressive fashion; lies, deception, sarcasm, sloth, carelessness, theft, suicidality or para-suicidality which may be exploited for emotional blackmail. Frequently depressed and anxious - may be overtly aggressive against lower status individuals or with a sudden switch in balance of power. Extremely Low: Passivity. Goal seeking is almost abandoned or limited to meeting only v basic biological needs, often through ineffective methods such as begging or living off refuse; even this may be abandoned. Individual is totally pushed around by others without any resistance at all. Extreme depression and anxiety, and May become terminal as becomes burnt out through chronic anxiety. Apparently in the death camps some individuals developed an invariably fatal condition that was called " Mussulman " which was like this - where there was little or no attempt to resist beatings and they could be beaten to death for refusing to leave their bunks. This is a gross over-simplification and most individuals switch continually between the different behaviors even if they specialise in a particular one. Also serotnin worlks i na very comples way and different serotnergic pathways have very different effects, which is why Prozac and Paxil, both SSRIs, can have very different effects. A problem with raising the serotonin levels of a very depressed person is that they may show problematic behaviors like Aggression, anxiety, and passive aggression which they did *not* previously show, and they may need to be titrated upwards very carefully to allow them and their peer group to adjust. apparently some individuals can titrate Prozac up very slowly by taking it in liquid form. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2001 Report Share Posted April 25, 2001 At 04:24 PM 4/25/01 +0100, you wrote: > I was amazed at the vehemence of your reply which tended to >mirror your earlier responses to my postings. It appears that you feel you >have the only truth and all else falls short of your all-seeing eye. I am >sorry you have chosen to communicate in this fashion and hope your >overbearence is not your main characterisitic, as many will be afraid to >convey their own views due to the intemperance shown by you to those who >might choose to differ. I shall, however, attempt to put my views and >thoughts over in a more pleasant and productive fashion. I have no need to >rubbish the views of others on order to sustain my own. Cloaking an ad hominem argument in smarmy language is still an ad hominem argument. > You assume life begins at conception/birth. If, in fact, life does not >begin at conception/birth, as many schools of thought propose, then the > " mind " (or spririt) and the brain may indeed be seperate entities with the >mind indeed controlling the brain. And if, as you posit, the mind and brain are separate entities, how does it follow the the mind necessarily controls the brain. Only because you say it does? Actually this begs the question, lends an irrelevant conclusion. > So to >introduce chemicals to the brain for problem which exists primarily in the >mind only makes the situation worse in the long term. What does 'primarily' mean...in the brain too? So there is a threshold whereby a certain percent existing " primarily " in the brain then justifies the introduction of chemicals? The irrelevance of the rest of the discussion founded on the circular nature of your argument does not inspire further discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2001 Report Share Posted April 25, 2001 At 04:24 PM 4/25/01 +0100, you wrote: > I was amazed at the vehemence of your reply which tended to >mirror your earlier responses to my postings. It appears that you feel you >have the only truth and all else falls short of your all-seeing eye. I am >sorry you have chosen to communicate in this fashion and hope your >overbearence is not your main characterisitic, as many will be afraid to >convey their own views due to the intemperance shown by you to those who >might choose to differ. I shall, however, attempt to put my views and >thoughts over in a more pleasant and productive fashion. I have no need to >rubbish the views of others on order to sustain my own. Cloaking an ad hominem argument in smarmy language is still an ad hominem argument. > You assume life begins at conception/birth. If, in fact, life does not >begin at conception/birth, as many schools of thought propose, then the > " mind " (or spririt) and the brain may indeed be seperate entities with the >mind indeed controlling the brain. And if, as you posit, the mind and brain are separate entities, how does it follow the the mind necessarily controls the brain. Only because you say it does? Actually this begs the question, lends an irrelevant conclusion. > So to >introduce chemicals to the brain for problem which exists primarily in the >mind only makes the situation worse in the long term. What does 'primarily' mean...in the brain too? So there is a threshold whereby a certain percent existing " primarily " in the brain then justifies the introduction of chemicals? The irrelevance of the rest of the discussion founded on the circular nature of your argument does not inspire further discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.