First person accounts which verify brain/mind meds work?

Post Reply New Topic

First person accounts which verify brain/mind meds work a little (not a cure). There are so many medicines sold for the brain/mind that it is surprising, to me, that there are so few written accounts which attest to meds working a little. Two accounts which I recall are Remarkable Medicine by Jack Dreyfus (about the epilepsy medicine, Dilantin) and a How To (understand) Hyperactivity book (1981) about ADHD Inattentive (about the alertness/paying attention medicines, Tirend and NoDoz). In both cases, both Dreyfus and Wild were so surprised that a FDA approved medicine would work a little on the brain/mind (not a cure) that they wrote books about their experiences. Why are so many medicines sold for the brain/mind yet there are so few independent accounts of FDA approved medicines working well at all? Why aren't there dozens of similar type books written by users vs only two/only a few?

I know that abilifi helped my depression, but chemical imbalance was only one part of that - I had to get my thoughts beyond it as well. Adderal did more to affect my sleep patterns than my concentration.

I think the overall lack of independent accounts or "success stories" is that the drugs only work part of the problem. Overcoming the rest can take significant time and work.

I know that Quetiapine helped massively with the psychotic and depressive symptoms of my schizoaffective disorder, and lamotrigine (to a lesser extent) seems to have helped with the mood swings.

I'm not going to write a book about it though. For one thing, who on God's green earth would publish it? Good news doesn't sell.

I'm on an assortment of meds for bipolar disorder. The change has been so radical I still can hardly believe it. Before I was so weighted down by my emotions that I was extremely dysfunctional...couldn't handle college or hold down a job. Now I'm working and putting myself through school (keeping my grades up, too)! Of course, not everything is absolutely perfect, but it pales in comparison to my life before.

I'm on a fairly large dose of dextroamphetamine for my ADHD (and it's also worked well in treating my depression), and I definitely notice the difference on when I'm on it or off of it, as do the people around me.

"Why are so many medicines sold for the brain/mind yet there are so few independent accounts of FDA approved medicines working well at all?"

Because they don't work well.

I suspect there are only a few published "success" stories because although the psychotropic drugs may initially mitigate acute symptoms, allowing periods of work which gives rise to hope, that hope is quickly overshadowed by the awful side effects from the drugs. For many the treatment is as bad or worse than the illness.

Most of the enthusiastic promotion of psychotropic drugs is done by pharmaceutical representatives using studies funded by the same pharmaceutical companies. That enthusiasm translates to doctors who then present a "hopeful" picture to patients that psychotropic drugs will give them a "near normal" life. Alas in real life this is just not the case. Instead what people find is that what the illness prevented them from doing and enjoying, is now prevented by the side effects from the drugs. So it becomes a catch-22. Don't take the drugs, suffer with wild mood swings, and possible psychosis or suicide. Take the drugs, and suffer with cognitive impairment, memory problems, anxiety and assorted other health problems like extreme weight gain, insomnia, akathasia, diabetes, and expensive dental work. Either way the person is going to find it difficult if not impossible to hold down a full time job, much less maintain solid friendships.

Those who seem to carve out a happy life using these drugs, use them sparingly, either in very low doses, or in higher doses for short periods of time. Have not read of anyone who uses them non-stop for years that has a "normal" life now.

P.S. Some of the side effects don't show up till decades later. That constant dry mouth ? Not much other than an annoying side effect until years later when you need extensive (and expensive) dental work. The weight gain ? Frustrating at first, then after years it snowballs into diabetes, high cholesterol, and high blood pressure.

I think you assume it is diffiuclt to get FDA approval, when in fact it is incredibly easy. The FDA has in most cases put such enormous restrcitions on the advertising of the drugs that the drug companies cannot advertise them themselves. The restrictions on advertising are put on, because the research presented to get the drugs approved has been so flawed that it cannot be seen as real research and shows absolutely nothing at all. To get approval, they have to prove the drug is not lethal in a four week period and that some people did gain some benefit from it, either equal to or better than placebo, over a 4 week period. That is all that is required. They then try and tell you that you should be on these meds for life when there is no research at all to support that statement.

I have benefited from being on a low dose of an antidepressent, but I have not benefited from any other drugs. The side effects were huge and I also gained nothing from them either. Either way the fact is my life is not simply a chemical imbalance in my brain, it is much more complicated than that and I do need to deal with the real issues in my life.

Reality is that the rates for recovery from mental illness today are the worst they have ever been in history and are worse than they were at the beginning of the 20th century when the treatment of the day was to wrap people in wet sheets. Psychiatry has always had wonder stories to justify their million different therapies and the drugs of today are no differnet than the stories they told in the past. They always had people who said that XXX treatment saved them, the case studies and other research was always great and then when some other treatment came out it was said to not be so good. Medication is no different. Research has consistently showed that the newer medications are no more effective, no less side effects than the first generation of whatever drugs, it is just that the drug companies have the funding to spend on advertising campaigns to sell drugs under patents, verses those that are not, and the more expensive the drugs the more advertising they do!! ! You can find a person who will say insulin coma saved their live, ECT saved there live, being wrapped in wet sheets saved their live, labotomy saved their life, thorazine saved their live, etc, etc, etc. Smoking causes lung cancer that does not mean that every single person who smokes will develop lung cancer. The best research consistently shows that the best results are found in people on very low or intimitent doses of medication. Does that mean that no one does well on it, no but on the whole they do not, and so the miracle stories the drug companies want you to believe are not as common as those of people on low or no doses of medication, just like most people who smoke will have health issues from it, most people will be worse of on meds. It is an individaul decision to make to weight up the pro's and con's of what a medication can do for you, but you do need to be aware of the limitions of medication. The fact that over 50% of people recover while on placebo in trails says that a lot of what makes people well is just the thought that they are being treated!! !

I think this video clip says it all really well!! !!
http://balts.squarespace.com/blog/2011/ ... nt11025373

Taking Lexapro helped me a lot in terms of depression, anxiety, and some OCD. People could tell that I seemed more...better mooded(?) and more relaxed than before I was taking anything. My ADHD medications (Adderal/Vyvanse) work wonders for me. I can actually concentrate and pay attention in school and on non academic things as well (video games and drawing, skills improved in both so much it's odd). Aside from that I don't think that everything's 100% with the meds. The Lexapro is working for some things, but I 65% feel like crap all day. I've always thought I had a Schizophrenic disorder so perhaps that's why...

So no drug is a wonder drug. Everyone's body is different and the dosages/ingredients may not be right for some. Your life/experiences can affect how you feel and the pills can't turn off everything that poses a threat to your happiness. Some may also be on the wrong type of med for their condition or be under/over/mis-diagnosed.

Also, brand and generic can be make or break for many. For me the generic head/psychotropic drugs were awful experiences. I've been told (by a mental health professional) that it's best to stick with brand name (actually FDA approved) meds. Generics take the FDA approved patent and make them w/o an expensive brand name, but they aren't always tested as the originals were, for problems or adverse side effects.

Generics are made after a patent expires. A medication is patented, which means that the chemical compounds of it are kept secret and it is against the law to copy it. The patents are in place for a number of years, usually 10 - 20. After that the full chemical compounds of the drugs, and the exact make up of them are made public. A generic is the exact same chemical compound, they do not need to test something that is 100% identical to what has already been tested. Generics are cheap, because other companies make them and price them lower and so the price of the original is bought time, they continue to compete for the market and so the prices continue to get lower. To say that you need to take a named brand is stupid. It is physiologically impossible for a generic to be anything but 100% identical to the original brand name. They are tested to make sure they are 100% identical, they do not carry out trials and the like to get the medications approved for human use there is no need when they are already being used and are 100% identical to what is already out there. But then again mental health professionals are paid so much by drug companies, they will tell anyone anything to keep them on named brands and to build up their profits. BUT I can assure you there is not a hospital around that would be using named brands as they would have to pay much more to do so. If the hospitals do not use them then why do they expect us to pay for them?? It is against the law for any medication to be prescribed that is not FDA approved. Generics are FDA approved as they are the exact same drug that that brand name produced and the FDA do do regular tests on any drugs at all times to ensure that what the companies claim to be putting into it is continuning to be put into it. You cannot buy a generic drug that is not FDA approved, unless you are buying it on the black market. You would not be buying it from a pharmist with a prescription, unless it was FDA approved.

I have certainly heard many stories that claim that generics are not the same as brand name, but the fact is that scientifically it is impossible for them not to be. A compound is a compound and it does not matter what the name is on the packet, if the drug is 100% identical to the one on one packet to the next then it is impossible for it to be different. Saying a drug is the same though, does not apply to drugs of the same category. A SSRI is not the same as all other SSRI's as they all different compounds, though acting on the same part of the brain. But the compound for prozac is that same compound, regardless of the package it is in. Unless they have added something else to the compound, in which case it is no longer a geric and is a totally diferent drug it is the same. It is like saying oxygen is not oxygen, but it is, unless you add something else to it. In order for a generic to be prescribed and to be allowed to be called the same name, which they are, then they do have to be the exact same compound, and they also have to be produced with the exact same dosage levels. Prozac and Zoloft are not the same, no, they are both SSRI's but they are different compounds, but both of them are out of patents and the generics of prozac are identical to prozac it is physiologically impossible for them not to be. It is the physiology I believe. I do not need to read some first person accounts to know what is physiologically in a pill. If you believe the pills are not the same and then you can report it to the FDA and have the package assessed to ensure that it is the same. It is against the law for them to sell anything that is not 100% identical to the named brand drug. If you have any doubt about that ask the FDA, and if you honestly believe you are not being given the same then report it to the FDA it is against the law for them not to be exactly the same. And if hospitals use generics then why should people in the community not.

I can assure you there is no country in which generics cannot be used. But that is not to say that many of the drugs prescribed in the US are available in Europe as they have much higher standards of proof which do have to be met before they are allowed on the market. But once a drug is allowed, it is the compound that is allowed, not the name of the drug and providing the compounds are the same then they are certainly used in all countries of the world. I wonder if you are getting confused with the idea that a class of drug are not the same as other drugs in that class and that is the same for all types of drugs, but to say an identical compound is not the same is simply not true. If it was not the same then it would not be the same from one packet of medication to the next one.

buspirone definately helped me with my first quarter at the college that I am going to, not making me more sociable but making me able to go to class and focus on what i needed to get done.

psychotropic (if I spelled it write) drugs should in most cases be temprory, what they can do is help someone build patterns of behavior that are benificial and then eventually they should be done without the drugs.

are there some horror stories? yes, I have gone through them

not all of them cause side effects that are so bad you cannot manage, many of them or maybe most of them do but there are a few you can find through trial and error that do not give you these terrible feelings. I try and just go buy if my body feels like it is really rejecting it then I probably shouldn't, be taking it- which is annoying to psychologists because i reject most of their meds.

there is also those that are very beneficial to people but are very side effect prone as well so it's both the really good and the really bad. I think these meds are the worst because then the person is really confused as to whether they should continue because the benifit is very visible but the side effects make them feel as if they might die. what's worth more? success or you're life? Usually it's not life threatening but it can feel like it at times and yes there will probably be long term side effects. These drugs haven't been studied "long term" because they haven't been around long enough.

You can say screw it, i'm gonna die sometime anyways. You can say screw that I am not going to give away my life to some dumb med. You can say who knows, maybe I wont get long term effects. You can say everyone else manages on them, so I guess I can too.

At the end of the day, your decision.

I am one person who has benefited from such medications, and do choose to take them. I have very mild to no side effects, primarily because I am on a low dose, but I also know that most people are not as lucky as me. The problem is that people are not being given choices. In most cases people are on forced treatment orders, and not being given the right to make a decision. Only the individaul concerned can decide whether the side effects outweight the benefits of the drugs. If the drugs work brillantly and the side effects are only moderate then the choice is fine, but the fact is there med's do not work for anyone and nor will they ever work for anyone. Why should someone be forced to take them and most people are, when they are not even doing anything for them, and yet the side effects are incomprehensible. People have a right to refuse all sorts of medical treatments, including resuciatation, blood transfusions and the like and to effectly kill themselves. Why can people not make informed decisions about psychiatric medications. If people are truly a danger to other people that is different, but just because people are odd, talk out loud or whatever, does not give us a right to shorten their live.

To say that these drugs have not been around long enough to really know is very niave. All the top groups, APA, NAMI, NIMH and the like all agree that psychotropic medications cause life expectancies to be decresed by up to 30 years. The newer medications have been proven by all groups to be as harmful as the first ones and no less harmful. Prozac was first in existence in studies and the like from 1971, so there is plenty of research around it. It might have taken until 1989 to get FDA approval, but that was because they could not prove it was benefical.

In order to get FDA approval they have to present a study of a certain number of people that shows it is more effective than placebo. Simple really if the first one doesn't show it, they just do another and another and another and sooner or later they will get the 50% better they needed and then they have the FDA approval. One would think the FDA would need to look at the whole lot of studies, but they only have to see ONE study that shows they are benefical, and it does not matter how many were done before that. Prozac was being tested as an antihistamine and many other things first. It was not until 1983 that they even considered mental illnesses, and then they tried it for a variety of other conditions first. Then they tried it in hospitalised depression and that made them worse, so they then got a community sample of mild depression and found what they wanted. The rest is all clever marketing and all the psychotropic medications are pretty much the same.

I do take medication and I do feel that one of them has saved my life and kept me alive, not to mention functioning and the like. But that is when I have choosen to take medication and had the full truth explained to me. I have had way too much forced medication which did nothing for me than cause way too many unwanted side effects. But my experience is not everyones, and what helps me does not help everyone.

you cannot say they do not have long term effects, long term doesn't have to mean 1 year, 5 years or 6 months. It is possible for the long term effects to not show up until 20-50 years later.These drugs haven't been around long enough for someone on them to have lived long enough to see whether the normal rate of mental decline that comes with age will occur more rapidly in those who have been on psychotropic drugs at some point in their lives. This is a possibility though and it is not naive to say this but I might have worded it wrong. It's not proven, I am not saying this is fact but it is a fact that at this time we do not know. Testing a drug for years would not tell us this answer, it would take data probably spanning around 100 years to see whether this will occur or not.

The statistical analyses that suggests these drugs cause people to die thirty years earlier is flawed, to say the least. For a start, people with serious mental health problems have a shorter life expectancy anyway, due to suicide and self neglect. Someone who becomes an alcoholic, for example, because it's the only way to get to sleep, is not going to live as long as someone who is not self medicating. People who forget to eat properly are not going to be as healthy as someone with a healthy appetite. Is the "thirty years shorter life span" based on the average life expectancy of someone with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, or is it based on the average life expectancy of the entire population? Also, the idea that the drugs are cutting into life expectancy as sharply as that... is this taking into account everyone who is ever on psychotropic medication at some point in their life? If so, then those who are medically non compliant have a shorter life expectancy than those who remain on their meds. How is this factor weighted for?

Where is an academically solid, well researched and referenced study that supports the idea that psychotropic medications reduce life expectancy by up to thirty years? People need all the facts before them before being scared into making decisions that aren't necessarily best for them. I know for a fact my life expectancy would have been far less if I hadn't found the right meds, because chances are high that I'd have ended up killing myself.