View on Antidpressants

I don't think anyone here is saying that there aren't some cases in which people have real, verifiable mental illnesses.

It's the way the doctors (who practice Freudian psychology and others) who prescribe these meds for all sorts of stuff instead of getting to the root of the problem (spiritual).

A friend of mine who is a headmaster at a private school for gifted kids says that there are some kids who simply cannot function without Ritalin. But, out of 400 children at his school, there are 4, and he's not sure about 1 of those. Compare this to the number of children who are actually on Ritalin!

Anti-depressants are the same way. Not happy in your marriage? Here's a happy pill! Kids not behaving? Here's a happy pill! Don't feel like getting up in the mornings? Here's your happy pill!

 

What clinical trials? Did you perform them? If not, which ones are you referring to?

Let me help you out and give you some evidence for what you say, just to show I'm not coming from one side only.

Here is a set of clinical trials which appear to show what you are stating. Make sure you read the editors notes.

http://snipurl.com/clickfortrial

Now, here is the rebuttal for it.

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/157/3/327


For the first article I gave you, why do you agree with it?

For the second one, what part of the editors notes and the rebuttal do you disagree with?

Do the people behind either study have possible ulterior motives? Do you believe those motives could have any bearing on the results of the research?

Also, I never said all anti-depressants are great and wonderful. If you're going to comment on what I say, you need to read what I have said. Let me copy and paste what I said:

That can be found on page ten of this thread.

I'm not trying to be mean to you. I'd like to discuss this with you, but please don't add misrepresentation of my words to the list of problems I already have with how you've presented your arguments on this thread.

 

Happy is that people that is in such a case; Yea, happy is that people whose God is the Lord. Psalm 144 last verse.

 

Shell, how are you doing?

Has any of this discussion been of any help, or are you now more confused about it than before you asked?

 

I'm not a mathematician, so I will not address statistical gathering methods in either article. The authors of the second article do not appear to be challenging the math skills of their detractors for the most part. Their position appears to be that, while there is the appearance of little significant effect, it is only because they are interpretting the data incorrectly.

The argument that the drugs may be acting as an enhanced placebo due to the obvious side effects is not adequately addressed, other than to say maybe it just really works. They do say that the studies where active placebo were used do not demonstrate that there is sufficient difference between the active and inert placebo. It doesn't state what types of active placebo were used. Regardless, it should be apparent that the only way to be 100% sure would be to give a double blind test with placebo that mimic the particular side effects of the drug, but where would you get such a devilish sugar pill?

The correlation between the perceived drug affect and the placebo affect as demonstrated in the figure 1 of the first article should demonstrate that the results are not completely unbiased. One could imagine that given a sufficiently representative sample, there should be some type of baseline placebo constant effect, but this is not the case. Obvious explaination would be that the greater the results expected, the greater the results experienced. So at least some of the efficacy of the drugs must be placebo.

probably

Speaking of reactions, when my wife went off her zoloft, one of the reactions that she got to experience was facial contortions and growling/barking like a dog. One might have thought she had a devil, in fact I'm still not convinced.

I have spent almost 3 hours writing this post between phone calls at work, so I apologize if it seems incoherent or does not address some critical point that I have overlooked. Its the best I can do.

 

In summary, all I have ever said is that the drugs do not do what the commercials say (correct a chemical imbalance). Do they affect the brain? Yes. Is this effect beneficial? Doubtful. Might it feel better? Sure. I have very dry skin/eczema symptoms. Sometimes my legs will itch so bad that I will scratch until I am bleeding. Does this make the itch feel better? You betcha!

 

I think Shell will need some heavier stuff after this thread!

 

Amen, Brother James!

The anti-depressants do not cure the problem, they only make one not worry about the problem.

Christ can both cure the problem and make one not worry about it.

As far as the eczema, I too can scratch my legs until they are raw at times.

 

Excuse me? Let's take a walk through this thread and see if that's all you said.
Nope, here's what you said:

1. You said that antidepressants are almost as ineffective as placebos.

2. You said that those who suffer from depression should be glad to suffer from it, and that by taking medication, they're not trusting Jesus.

Page 18

3. You said that the doctors who prescribe anti-depressants don't know how they work.

Page 5

4. You said that those who take antidepressants only have emotional arguments.

Page 7

5. You claimed that the following bible verse could be used as proof against antidepressants:

Page 8

6. You said that depression is not an illness, and that calling it an illness is just a way to cover up sin.

Page 9

7. You said that psychology and psychiatry are not scientific.

page 9

8. You said that using anti-depressants was quackery and/or witchcraft.

page 13

9. You said that fixing depression instead of suffering with it was anti-biblical and a compromise that would deprive us of blessings.

page 13

10. You said that taking antidepressants is a wrong solution.

page 14

11. You said that women get depressed because they have careers, and that a career and a family is an unbiblical principle for a woman.

page 14

12. You said that unless they can see depression in the upper stomach, esophagus, and duadonem, the idea of a chemical imbalance is nullified. (that was my favorite one)

page 17

13. You said that Christians have problems with depression because they have no motivation to go on living, because they think getting saved was enough.

page 18

14. You mocked the use of antidepressants and compared the validity of it with telling people to get hooked on cocaine.

page 23

Then, you say all you ever said was that antidepressants do not do what the commercials say, along with the additional comment that

15. It is doubtful that antidepressants have beneficial effects.

page 25

I have kids. Never tell me "all I said/did was..." It's a direct challenge to a mommy to straighten THAT right out. You'll never win an argument that begins with that phrase.

 

Shell, let us know how your appointment goes. (if you dare :laugh: )

 

You did good Gina.

 

:laugh: :smilewinkgrin:

 

Yes, has poor Shell gotten anything out of this? I do hope so.

 

All you have shown is that there is a controversy over this. I just asked why this would be the case?

I'll stand by it.

From the Prozac website:
Depression is not fully understood, but a growing amount of evidence supports the view that people with depression have an imbalance of the brain's neurotransmitters, the chemicals that allow nerve cells in the brain to communicate with each other. Many scientists believe that an imbalance in serotonin, one of these neurotransmitters, may be an important factor in the development and severity of depression.

PROZAC may help to correct this imbalance by increasing the brain's own supply of serotonin.

Yes which is opposed to sound logic. I have a chemical imbalance.

I said I would be like Paul and not be brought under the power of Prozac.

Then I guess that all depends on what your definition of illness is. Some people think Christianity is a mental disorder.

I'll stand by that as well. Psychology has always been the redheaded stepchild of 'scientific' disciplines. It is no wonder that they are so eager to prescribe medications, as if being a drug pusher somehow ligitimizes their craft.

Why not try Kaballah water?

I don't have a problem with fixing things. I haven't seen anything get fixed yet.

I say its no solution.

Absolutely. Sorry if that offends your feminist sensibilities. No I'm not.

Yeah, I liked that one too.

No, I said they had no motivation for living, no wonder they are depressed. I don't know if this causes depression, but I do have a treatment for lack of motivation. It's called the Judgment Seat of Christ. When used regularly as a motivational treatment, patients find that they are able to look beyond themselves and see others as more important than they. And when they begin to minister to others outside themselves, they find that they have been ministered to in the process. Sitting on a couch and pitying ones self is not consistant with an overcoming Christian walk, nor is it consistant with the faith that was once delivered to the saints. It may be consistant with a diet composed of primarily starch and sugar.

Cocaine treats the same symptoms.

and it took this long to tell it. But don't forget that they really do cause all those nasty side effects that are supposed to prove that the 'medicine' is working.

 

It's funny how some people will tell you just to suffer through it because taking medication for it is not trusting in Jesus. Then when you look at his picture, he is wearing glasses. To me, that is hippocritical. If taking medication is not trusting Jesus, then your wearing glasses is not trusting in Jesus either. You should throw them away and suffer through it.

Of course, I do not believe that myself. I thank God that he gave people the smarts to make the lenses so that I can use them and not be a burden on others. The same for medication. Just my two cents.

 

SFIC has already said that the glasses were cosmetic, the same way I wear a ball cap...

 

TC,

Nothing hypocritical about it at all. I have been blind for many, many years. I cannot even see through these glasses, so they are more decoration than anything else.