Research into brain disorders under threat as drug firms pull out

[upndownboi]

Research into brain disorders under threat as drug firms pull out

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20...at?INTCMP=SRCH

Recent announcements by companies such as UK-based GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca that they no longer intend to research new antidepressant drugs...

perhaps this means less pills and more alternative therapies.

[broflovski]

Discouraging. I see now that there is a great distance between all that initial promising studies of something like delta-agonists, enkephalinase inhibitors etc (thousands them) and them being marketed.
But we still have an infinite number of potential combinations...

[A Sense of Purpose]

It is indeed scary, but i can understand why.
As i have posted before, new drug development (especially one involving a substance thats bound to have side effects) are becoming harder to fund, research and market. It costs somewhere between $1-2 billion for a drug to go through development, and all phase trials (so thats around 7-10 years).
A very expensive flop if approval by the FDA is not granted...

[QuietBoy99]

According the article; drug companies are leaving because they are scared of being sued for adverse effects caused by the harmful drugs. I'm not surprised lawsuits are piling up everyday and most of them are settled out of court. The profits that drug companies make are more than the fortune 500 companies COMBINED so 1 or 2 billion is nothing. I guess it's finally catching up with the drug companies. I hope they enjoy.

[Duke of Prunes]

Originally Posted by upndownboi

perhaps this means less pills and more alternative therapies.

Which is a bad thing because unlike proper medicine, 'alternative therapies' (assuming you're talking about wishy washy 'natural health' crap) don't have to go through trials in the most of the world, and any con artist can perform them outside of any kind of regulations.

Trialling and researching the effects of new/seldom used classes of drugs usually brings with it new knowledge. On the other hand, letting so-called 'practitioners' of these 'alternative therapies' keep on regurgitating the same old rubbish about how 'DRUGS ARE BAD FOR YOU AND BIG PHARMA IS EVIL' until everybody starts to believe it is a step backwards and potentially holds back the scientific progress that could actually help people like us.

[upndownboi]

Only one anti-depressant, Agomelatine, has been licensed in the last 10 years, compared with 10 new drugs for epilepsy. Companies are also increasingly fearful of lawsuits, as patients pursue them through the courts over the adverse effects of medicines.

since when was depression a brain disorder? except in the loosest sense

[upndownboi]

Originally Posted by Duke of Prunes

Which is a bad thing because unlike proper medicine, 'alternative therapies' (assuming you're talking about wishy washy 'natural health' crap) don't have to go through trials in the most of the world, and any con artist can perform them outside of any kind of regulations.

my bad-poor use of words, i meant talking therapies and other such things

[Duke of Prunes]

Originally Posted by upndownboi

my bad-poor use of words, i meant talking therapies and other such things.

Fair enough, though talking therapies aren't really much use to people who actually have neurological disorders that result in mental illness (see: ADHD, some forms of SA, bipolar, psychotic illnesses, etc), compared to drugs.

[TheoBobTing]

Originally Posted by upndownboi

the elephant in the room- since when was depression a brain disorder? apart from in the very loosest sense

Do elaborate.

For me, governments should be doing more about depression/anxiety. These are such common problems, and they are very costly in many ways. But then again, if the general public doesn't put pressure on its government to do more then said government wont bother, and we all know that the general public would rather forget about mental illness.

[A Sense of Purpose]

Originally Posted by QuietBoy99

According the article; drug companies are leaving because they are scared of being sued for adverse effects caused by the harmful drugs. I'm not surprised lawsuits are piling up everyday and most of them are settled out of court. The profits that drug companies make are more than the fortune 500 companies COMBINED so 1 or 2 billion is nothing. I guess it's finally catching up with the drug companies. I hope they enjoy.

The reason their drugs are expensive and they "make a big profit" as you seem to think is due to liability. They know they they will be sued at one stage or another and they want to protect themselves from that. Every drug has side effects and its a very grey area for psychiatrists for a number of reasons. IMO people should do their own research, of find a decent psych if they have any doubts.

[upndownboi]

Originally Posted by TheoBobTing

Do elaborate.

depression's more intangible than more 'solid' neurological conditions. Its tragic how unrefined a depression diagnosis is these days still, refinement will allow more effective treatment w/o resorting to pot luck of 'med merry-go-rounds' or indescriminate carpet bombing nardil-style. Richard Bentall writes some nice comments to that article btw. apparantly he proposed adding happiness to the DSM as 'major affective disorder: pleasant type', i can't deny it has a certain reciprocal logic to it.

[blakeyz]

So I just want to say a big thanks to all the hypochondriacs out there for stuffing it up for the rest of us. FFS

[49erJT]

..

[QuietBoy99]

Originally Posted by A Sense of Purpose

The reason their drugs are expensive and they "make a big profit" as you seem to think is due to liability. They know they they will be sued at one stage or another and they want to protect themselves from that. Every drug has side effects and its a very grey area for psychiatrists for a number of reasons. IMO people should do their own research, of find a decent psych if they have any doubts.

Drugs companies are out to make a profit not a cure; remember no money in a cure. It does seem that these drug companies are being sued A LOT more otherwise they wouldn't leave the field. True most drugs do have side effects, however when the last time you heard someone on taking Tylenol and then committing a violent act, suicide, etc? Those are way more serious acts and very dangerous. What I recommend is to do research on the drugs themselves bad and good than make a choose of taking them or not; do not leave it to the doctor/psychiatrist because they will not tell you anything. Enjoy.

[A Sense of Purpose]

sigh...

[A Sense of Purpose]

Originally Posted by QuietBoy99

True most drugs do have side effects, however when the last time you heard someone on taking Tylenol and then committing a violent act, suicide, etc? Those are way more serious acts and very dangerous. What I recommend is to do research on the drugs themselves bad and good than make a choose of taking them or not; do not leave it to the doctor/psychiatrist because they will not tell you anything. Enjoy.

K... Tylenol also causes liver failure in some individuals. Should that be banned from sales? Sure we know that depressed people suicide. We also know that depressed people who take meds can also suicide. However anyone that claims to know whether it is the illness itself or whether a particular med is to blame would be a moron. Meds have also been known to greatly improve people's problems. The risks are well known. It is up to an individual to decide for themselves if this type of treatment is for them.

Do you really believe that the suffering individuals who are helped by meds, should go without them if meds were banned or withdrawn? Seriously... Let the individual decide.

[Edit: just what exactly is your motive? Why do you keep quoting things i say, with the intention of starting an argument? There was a reason i left the other discussion where it was. You seem to shadow what i say but refute it at the same time.]

Originally Posted by QuietBoy99

What I recommend is to do research on the drugs themselves bad and good than make a choose of taking them or not; do not leave it to the doctor/psychiatrist because they will not tell you anything. Enjoy.

This is exactly what i said in the other thread regarding meds and legislation. You did not (at that point in time) agree with me. Im glad you seem to have come around however.

[crayzyMed]

Originally Posted by broflovski

Discouraging. I see now that there is a great distance between all that initial promising studies of something like delta-agonists, enkephalinase inhibitors etc (thousands them) and them being marketed.
But we still have an infinite number of potential combinations...

Your right about the infinate numer, its possible some systems dont work without others, such as serotonine levels being needed for gaba to work, wich makes it difficould to see what could help, anyway it explains the effiacy of MAIO's they act on most neurotransmitters implicated in our disorder and will also target additional problems in our brains.

I dont think we should be thinking about regelating this and that and upregulate anymore, because its a fact that the brain is just to complex, you can only find out by trying a ton of stuff.

[A Sense of Purpose]

Originally Posted by crayzyMed

I dont think we should be thinking about regelating this and that and upregulate anymore, because its a fact that the brain is just to complex, you can only find out by trying a ton of stuff.

Likes this.

[TheoBobTing]

Originally Posted by upndownboi

depression's more intangible than more 'solid' neurological conditions. Its tragic how unrefined a depression diagnosis is these days still, refinement will allow more effective treatment w/o resorting to pot luck of 'med merry-go-rounds' or indescriminate carpet bombing nardil-style. Richard Bentall writes some nice comments to that article btw. apparantly he proposed adding happiness to the DSM as 'major affective disorder: pleasant type', i can't deny it has a certain reciprocal logic to it.

I very much doubt that. Depression only seems intangible because our understanding of the physical processes occuring in the brain is limited. Senses of smell and sight might seem 'intangible' if we didn't understand the physical processes behind them.

[QuietBoy99]

Originally Posted by A Sense of Purpose

K... Tylenol also causes liver failure in some individuals. Should that be banned from sales? Sure we know that depressed people suicide. We also know that depressed people who take meds can also suicide. However anyone that claims to know whether it is the illness itself or whether a particular med is to blame would be a moron. Meds have also been known to greatly improve people's problems. The risks are well known. It is up to an individual to decide for themselves if this type of treatment is for them.

Do you really believe that the suffering individuals who are helped by meds, should go without them if meds were banned or withdrawn? Seriously... Let the individual decide.

[Edit: just what exactly is your motive? Why do you keep quoting things i say, with the intention of starting an argument? There was a reason i left the other discussion where it was. You seem to shadow what i say but refute it at the same time.]



This is exactly what i said in the other thread regarding meds and legislation. You did not (at that point in time) agree with me. Im glad you seem to have come around however.

Your not making any sense there; you keep replying to my post so I don't know why you keep doing it. I've been saying that to begin with that the individual should do their research first before taking any meds so you weren't paying any attention. Your the one who quoted me first so you need to stop if you don't want me to reply. I never said to ban or to withdraw from these harmful meds again research first than let the individual decide. I don't know if you read the article but the drugs companies are the ones who are withdrawing themselves from the industry.

Have you read other posts from other individuals who find these meds harmful and have stop taken them or are against them? You seem to ignore those. I know for a fact I'm not the only one. When was the last time someone committed murder, suicide, being violent that was linked to Tylenol? These drugs are similar to how cocaine works on the brain. So why not legalize cocaine? According to your theory.

I have always been saying let the individual decide.