Social Anxiety Support Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So lately I've been doing alot of reading about SSRI's and similar medications prescribed to people with depression and lots of other conditions. There is definitely something very suspicious about the way many of these chemicals being given to us are better at making us less likely to reproduce(by either shutting down our sex drive or actually causing problems with the "equipment") than they are at actually alleviating the symptoms they are supposed to treat.

There are actually many other treatments (including plain old exercise) that are just as good if not better at treating depression and do not have a tendency to chemically castrate the person being treated.

Does anybody else feel like they are being duped by a corporate oligarchy with a crypto-eugenics agenda? or am I just a paranoid schizophrenic?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,661 Posts
I'd say depressed/anxious people are even less likely to reproduce than those on SSRIs. Also, some antidepressants do not cause sexual dysfunction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
Absolutely I do. I don't trust antidepressants one bit. Or the government / powers that be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
191 Posts
No, I don't.

Taking antidepressants does decrease sex drive and for some causes impotency, but if one were intent on reproducing, he would find a way to work around this...just because you're taking an SSRI doesn't mean you are stripped completely of your sexual self.

And let's not forget about Wellbutrin, an antidepressant notorious for increased sexual arousal.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
38,431 Posts
Anyone who reads my posts regularly knows that complaining about both big pharma and our government are two of my frequent rants. But even I don't think this is some conspiracy.

Drug companies simply produce crap and sell it for maximum profit, avoiding discussion of its problems as much as possible. Sexual side effects along with lack of efficacy in many patients would be the major problem with SSRIs. The only role the government plays in this is that the DEA wants to make sure that they keep drugs of abuse away from junkies. Problem: the drugs that most effectively produce a rapid & profound mind-altering effect like taking away anxiety & depression are also going to be the drugs most wanted by junkies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
Any medication that alters your serotonin will effect sexual function in some way...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,661 Posts
Moclobemide (Aurorix, Manerix), phenelzine (Nardil), and tranylcypromine (Parnate) are all perfectly capable of causing sexual dysfunction. In fact, as you know already, I've experienced crippling anorgasmia on phenelzine.
Yeah I have no idea why I said that. Actually yes I do: I was ****ing wasted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,936 Posts
regular exercise and taking long walks can be very helpful for depression and anxiety
You know, I would LOVE to exercise. In fact, I would probably live at the gym if it weren't for this pesky fear of people thing I've got going :b
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
38,431 Posts
Besides, many antidepressants like bupropion (Wellbutrin) and mirtazapine (Remeron) don't cause any sexual dysfunction and actually facilitate sexual health.
Many? I think you might wish to choose a different word; I'd suggest 'few' as a more accurate term. You've just named two of the rare ADs that don't produce negative sexual effects. Serzone would be another. Of course, brand name Serzone was pulled from the market due its risk of causing death by liver failure; the generic is still available, though rarely used for obvious reason. Remeron doesn't seem terribly popular either, I'm guessing because it's well known for making patients fat & sleepy. In fact, it's prescribed as a sleep aid even due to this effect (admittedly, Remeron is a oddity where the side effect of drowsiness is reduced with higher doses that would typically be used for depression like 45 mg rather than the 15 mg that would be a likely sleep aid dose).

Wellbutrin would seem the optimal first line treatment for someone who suffers from depression alone, especially one who sleeps too much and lacks energy. Unfortunately, it's mildly stimulating (didn't bother me personally), and has the problem of causing anxiety & insomnia making it an unlikely choice for those who already suffer from those problems.

Now see how many other ADs you can name that don't cause sexual problems and compare that to how many ADs you can name in total. I think you'll find that 'many' is not the right word here.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
38,431 Posts
I'd say many is a fine word to use, thank you very much.

Here's the list: mirtazapine (Remeron), mianserin (Tolvon), maprotiline (Ludiomil), trazodone (Desyrel), nefazodone (Serzone), agomelatine (Valdoxan), atomoxetine (Strattera), reboxetine (Edronax), bupropion (Wellbutrin), amineptine (Survector), selegiline (Eldepryl, Zelapar, Emsam), tianeptine (Stablon), amisulpride (Solian), sulpiride (Sulpitil), buspirone (BuSpar), and tandospirone (Sediel), as well as methylphenidate (Ritalin, Focalin, Concerta), amphetamine (Adderall, Dexedrine), lisdexamfetamine (Vyvanse), and methamphetamine (Desoxyn); and yes, I am counting those latter stimulants as antidepressants. The tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) with weak serotonin reuptake inhibition and strong norepinephrine reuptake inhibition are also relatively unlikely of causing any sexual dysfunction, including desipramine (Norpramin, Pertofrane), nortriptyline (Pamelor, Aventyl), protriptyline (Vivactil), and dibenzepin (Noveril). Almost all antidepressant supplements like Hypericum perforatum (St. John's Wort), Rhodiola rosea (Golden Root), Ginkgo biloba (Ginkgo), L-phenylalanine, and L-tyrosine don't have any incidence of sexual dysfunction either.

Quite the list if I do say so myself.
That is indeed quite a list. There are at least 8 drugs on that list that I've never even heard of. And that's after 6.5+ years on SAS and 9+ years on anxiety/panic forums. I'm guessing some of these drugs are not FDA approved for sale in the US.

OK, I fully agree that Ritalin & all amphetamines clearly have an legitimate purpose as a treatment for depression, though they are not normally counted as ADs. And, let's face it, what are the odds of anybody getting a methamphetamine prescription for depression? Unless you've literally tried every drug for narcolepsy and still fall asleep in front of your doctor, you're not getting meth.

As for trazodone, it's used almost exclusively as a sleep aid. Probably because most who took it at the I think 400 mg level that's used for depression would likely be too tired to ever get out of bed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,661 Posts
This is why I refuse to take medication. I can funciton properly without it and I do not wish to go about my daily life sedated.
Most anti-anxiety/depression drugs are not sedative in nature; many are actually stimulating.

* By their own admission, psychiatrist do not know how to cure a single mental problem.

* They do not know how their treatments affect patients.

* According to one study, psychiatric treatment scored a 99% failure rate in patient recovery.

* In the last 40 years, nearly twice as many Aamericans have died in government psychiatric hospitals as Amrican soldiers killed in battle in all wars the United States has fought since 1776.

* More than 20 million children worldwide areon prescribed psychiatric drugs known to cause violence, pschosis, halucinations, suicide, homicide, strokes, diabetes, heart attacks and death for alleged disorders that have never been scientifically proven to exist.

* Antidepressant "wonder drugs" are so widely prescribed that more than 150 million people worldwide have taken Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants. These drugs are under fire by drug regulatory agencies, not only for theri potential to create violence and suicidal impulses, but because drug trials have found they perform no better than placebos (sugar pills).

* The number of Americans seniors ages 65 who receive electroshock is more than three and a half times that of those aged 64. Why? Government health insurance for senior citizens becomes available at 65.

* In 2005, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reported grievous damage from electroshock-patients sustaining severe burns, pregnant women suffering miscarriages and even death.

* Yet while almost half of the elderly who recieve ECT die within two years, psychiatrists continue to electroshock millions of people throughout the world, killing as many as 10, 000 people. More than two-thirds of ECT victims are women.

I have my issues but I realize that the more I expose myself to things which I'm afraid of doing, the more I feel more comfortable overall.
This is propaganda worthy of Joseph Goebbels' standards. "Correlation does not imply causation" is what I'd say to some of those statements, and generally these "facts" are heavily biased and simply selected to push the author's agenda. Some of these are just outright lies.

Total bull****. I'd bet money that those Scientology clowns had a hand in this. Edit: surprise sur-****ing-prise, this is directly from the Church of Scientology:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_Commission_on_Human_Rights

"The Citizens Commission on Human Rights (or CCHR) is an advocacy group established in 1969 by the Church of Scientology"


Please people, use your brain and do your own research. Scientology's anti-psychiatry (anti-science) movement can only be beaten if we all inform ourselves. Considering they have to resort to lies to push their agenda, it's not hard to see how little substance their arguments have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
it's unfortunate that thomas szasz got involved with the scientology groups on these commissions of human rights BS, because what he says actually makes sense. he believes that the psychiatrists represent a sort of modern "priestly" caste that controls the dispensing of medications - the same way priests in the middle ages controlled ideas about religion, because "peasants" were supposedly too dumb to read - and he believes that all drugs should be legal and be given by pharmacists directly to the patients (perhaps with a signed disclaimer like "we warned you of the basic interactions and usage, but you are taking responsibility for your actions and if you f up, it's your fault"). the only reason they connected is because szasz is also against the involuntary treatment of the "mentally dangerous".

i quite like this idea. i mean somehow i've ended up in a situation where it's easy to get my prescription for phenelzine (got 8 boxes from the UK in my fridge), yet nearly impossible to get a drug like neurontin or lyrica to help me reduce my dosage, because "my doctor isn't familiar with prescribing these". yet, he's not really familiar on some of the effects of even this phenelzine (inhibiting GABA transaminase, ALA-T, numerous other amino acid aminotransferases, semicarbazide-sensitive amine oxidases, tyrosine beta-hydroxylase, etc. etc.) that anyone with pubmed access (and possibly a university library account) can learn about themselves.

so if anyone's really taking advantage of the public, i believe it's the doctors and not the drug companies. they are prescribing medications with less knowledge of the established effects of drugs than 17 year olds on the internet, and to be honest, there is no drug whose mechanism has been 100% established anyway. so we as patients may know what is a plausible approach to achieve our goals (e.g., getting off phenelzine in my case) and have the only empirical evidence of what works and doesn't (e.g., 60mg/day works for me, 45mg is too stimulating, 75mg is too sedating, also that neurontin doesn't interact with MAOIs and can reduce stimulation/anxiety without much sedation), but no freedom to explore reasonable pathways towards achieving these goals except within the confines of what is available to us as peasants (e.g., vitamin B6 or calcium at the pharmacy).

so in the end, the patient becomes dependent on a drug, the doctor controls the means to get off the drug, and the drug companies are just profiting on the side. it doesn't matter if the drug will cause impotence or turn your penis blue, the side effect usually eventually goes away (anorgasmia faded in about 4 months for me, rocknroll) and for a lot of cases of treatment-resistant mood disorders, so does the primary effect (about 8 months there for me). at that point, you really need a doctor who is on top of his **** and willing to listen, and at least can see thomas szasz's point..

i'd be happy with a compromise where drugs with "no abuse potential" are freely available with signed consent forms, and doctors would be required for the other stuff. if the insurance companies don't want to cover the drugs without the doctor prescription, fine, i got enough money and give enough of a damn to pay for it myself... unfortunately im living in a country where the gov't will seize your meds if you try to obtain them yourself thru the mail
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
We are being duped by all the large industries. I thought after the bank bailout (Oh, nevermind, we're making plenty of money afterall??!!) we all knew that buying "product" is what they want us to do. There was a very short (<year) that I should have been on Paxil. Then it should have been a treatment that included getting rid of toxic food from my diet, exercising and moving towards a sincere version of myself. But I spent many years off and on drugs...I kinda resent it. This is true for me and you may have a different experience, which is okay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,676 Posts
Antidepressants haven't been around long enough, we don't know enough about them yet. They used to think cocaine was a miracle drug and prescribed it for just about everything, lol. I don't think antidepressants are quite as bad, but there will probably be some more bad news to come when more long-term studies are done.

I agree, exercise is very helpful. But I honestly don't think it is enough if your depression is primarily biological (the melancholic kind). First of all, have you ever tried getting a severely depressed person to go to the gym? It wouldn't be fun. Secondly, you would have to exercise several hours a day I think. I say that because I have tried half hour a day for several months and it is was not enough.

I even read one story about a marathon runner who suffered from depression. She was a top contender and was near the front, but she suddenly just stopped, not out of exhaustion, but because she no longer had the will power to go on. That's a rare case though. I would bet olympians have lower levels of depression.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
855 Posts
I often thought about this. Why is the FDA always declaring war on alternative health? They did find traces of prozac in our water supply... They've also started drugging children with Ritalin and several drugs in the early 90s with increased vaccinations and threatening parents about having them thrown out if they denied treatment. This opened up a huge opportunity for the drug companies..

We can all speculate about conspiracy theories all day but can never really put a finger on what's going on, because we don't know. It seems true that those who do street drugs occasionally and drink socially but don't have high inhibitions are likely to live healthier and more successful lives.

Antidepressants may have ruined some lives but also saved others.. It's all a matter of individualism. I don't think children should be given drugs, same way alcohol or even coffee isn't suggested for a growing mind, stimulant drugs or AD's affect the brains of children adversely. I think perhaps through congress there could be a change with the courts, but pharmaceuticals are literally unstoppable.
 

·
lamb to lion
Joined
·
663 Posts
So lately I've been doing alot of reading about SSRI's and similar medications prescribed to people with depression and lots of other conditions. There is definitely something very suspicious about the way many of these chemicals being given to us are better at making us less likely to reproduce(by either shutting down our sex drive or actually causing problems with the "equipment") than they are at actually alleviating the symptoms they are supposed to treat.

There are actually many other treatments (including plain old exercise) that are just as good if not better at treating depression and do not have a tendency to chemically castrate the person being treated.

Does anybody else feel like they are being duped by a corporate oligarchy with a crypto-eugenics agenda? or am I just a paranoid schizophrenic?
interesting idea, but nah I don't think. They don't care about eugenics they care about profit. And think about this: if that was their goal, then those people would not have kids and they would no longer have anyone to sell their pills to when all the mentally ill die out without offspring. They would be running themselves right outta business.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
I think they just want the money, and they don't really care if the ssri are safe or not, or if they work or not, and that leads to adverse effects, overprescription, etc.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top