?
I just read this in a mainstream news article. I mean, I already knew that women were crazy 
but there are a lot of sad people out there.
Makes me sad.
Headline: âPharmaceutical Industry Succeeds in Capturing Full Tenth of Marketâ
Subtitle: "Next Quarter Trends Even More Promising:
antidepressants are extremely helpful for people coping with overwhelming feelings of sadness and worthlessness⌠depression, as major depressive disorder (MDD, DSM IV), results from chemical imbalances and malfunctionings within the brainâs CNS and serotonic/dopominergic reward system. antidepressants are a successful way of dealing with this malfunctioning system, and are very helpful in assisting people with leading happier, more fulfilling and successful lives.
if you are assuming that antidepressants are bad or are a negative thing, that assumption is somewhat misinformed. true, some depression is cognitive or environmental and can be treated with therapy, but major depressive disorder cannot. it required active medical management if symptoms are to get better.
i certainly understand the anger or unhappiness with overpowering and seemingly-oppressive pharma in america, but lets give credit where credit is due⌠if you want to rage against the over-medication of american society, widespread amphetamine perscriptions to children with âADHDâ would perhaps be a
better target.
of course, it is telling that 10% of women can be diagnosed with MDD⌠likely these numbers are a gross exaggeration, since many people who experience depression do not have full-blown MDD, but rather are experiencing depressive symptoms for a variety of other reasons. since anti-depressants are over-prescribed, like nearly all medications, this fact IS somewhat, well, depressing. but as for the medications themselves, they are a very good thing, as long as they are being used to treat people who truly need them, and are not just sad or miserable because they are unhappy with how their life has turned out.
File my previous post under âHumorâ, but since weâre getting serious about itâŚ
I am in no way debating the usefulness of drugs of all varieties, both legal and illegal, patented and generic, natural and invented.
The real point boils down to this: If money were not factor in the use of drugs, then I would fully trust all advice from professionals. Thereâs too much motive scattered around this issue to trust anyone. Including headlines.
yes, doctors unfortumately over-prescribe in order to get bonuses and better positions. and pharma does tend to push treatments and drugs on people more than it should.
as far as profit motive, it is essential to pharmacological production itself. without the ability to generate revenue, there would be no drug companies, and no drugs. the money motivation behind the pharma industry and healthcare in general can certainly be problematic and harmful, but the motive itself is also necessary for any research or progress in the fields.
the best we can do is open the processes of healthcare to as much public awareness and critical assessment as possible, as well as set strict and rational standards for R&D and diagnosis. certainly it would be better if doctors were not motivated one way or another when prescribing, other than the needs of the patient, but at present this isnt really an option, since healthcare and pharma are so closely tied together⌠but i personally would support legislation that limited pharmaâs ability to bully, mandate or bribe doctors into using certain drugs over others, as long as this legislation did not violate the rights of the pharma companies to develop and sell their drugs as they see fit, or the rights of doctors to freely choose which treatments/drugs are best for their patients.
Doctors donât just over perscribe anti-depressant they perscribe those which donât beat placebo in trials. Effexor doesnât meet clinical significance.
If youâre depressed and want pills I want you to know that some studies show up to 73% of people on them get sexual side effects. The Serotonin/Vasopressin/Oxytocin/dopamine are envolved in the sex drive, altering them can jeopardize sexual function.
Anyway, love, pairbonding and other emotional drives correlate/overlap chemically/neurocognitive with the sex drive. WHEN YOU TAKE ANTI DEPRESSANTS YOU RISK your ability to feel love in a romantic relationship, pair bonding etc.
Serotonin crushes dopamine levels and many others associated with not being a zombie.
Depression is bad but emotional blunting can be worse.
Anti depressants statistically work poorly and they have endless side effects make the decision, if you do, as a last resort.
Not happier 3, less depressed. Hapiness isnât a state defined by lack of depression. Most people experience emotional blunting which effectively kills their ability to feel happiness, most people trade that to escape depression. but they complain while the depression is gone they feel little else.
Iâm not against anti depressants theyâre just more dangerous/side effect producing than the public realizes. Doctors will actively lie about the risks anti depressants pose to marriages etc
yeah, shopping will make you feel empty for unknown reasons. But the people on the commerical were smiling . . .
âŚIâm not surprised by that â1 out of every 10â stat. 
Pills do not stop suicidal ideation.
Women, I think, identify with a fluid nature. They are more easily convinced of chemical imbalances. Afterall, they navigate social situations like water, right, ladies? They try to kill themselves with those same pills, overdose, when a lot of men want to blast bullets thru their skull. Prefer it.
Richest country, most depressed . . .
1 in 10 people under 25 in the UK has ClamydiaâŚ
âŚI prefer our approach to dealing with stuff.
1 out 28 people get depressed because it gets darker early in the winter and holiday shopping puts pressure on them for the holiday approval of others. Of that 1/28, one tenth of those dress in santa suits and take a shotgun to the mall. The other 27 think snow melts too fast, but they are happy because they have always been summer weather people anyway. A popular news Channel did a poll of 2000 people to find this, so it must be indictive of everyone else who knew nothing of the poll. The numbers dont lie.
It should make you sad, because what this means is that pharmaceutical companies are making money by suppressing the symptoms of societal problems. Individuals are being pathologized, in this case, women, so that they can be seen as sick, rather than that there might be things external to them that need changing. The % of Americans who psychiatrists and pharmaceutical companies think should be medicated is astounding.
It is like everytime you feel pain you take morphine and like an idiot walk about with a nail in your foot.
Only we do this on a societal level. So 1 it is dumb and then 2 it is the product of parasitical minds.
If depression were as readily fixable as a nail in the foot, then it might be easier to share your indignance - but until youâve isolated the changeable factors that cause depression, then thereâs simply no way to remove the metaphorical nail. And if the nail canât be removed then, letâs face it, youâre better off with a regular dose of morphine than without âŚ
Or, we could use the money to try and figure out just exactly what the nail is, and where. As was suggested above, we are only
Therefore, the source of the dolor we experience it more likely found outside us, in our culture and our way of life, than it is some defect in our brains. If we could excise (exorcise?) those problems, a WHOLE lot of depression would simply disappear.
I propose (have been, always have) a total cultural overhaul - Culture 2.0. Remember, a new build of a program doesnât have to be a complete divorce from the old. Keep what works. Kill what doesnât. In the process we might just even kill the apocalypse.
Forget sad tired bedside cures. Group therapy will start at 9am after breakfast, and you will once again find faith in other people. Hey, people actually do sit around and talk stuff through! Then you can be discharged out to where people dont sit around and talk stuff through. And the weepy tissues collect by the bed.
Paranoia
Dont mention conspiracy, because you will be limited to one who uses a weak word. Mention it and it will be turned back on the accuser before any examination can be done. As if no people in the history of man have ever gathered in order to conspire.
Paranoia is hardly evident in rural tribe countries. Why would they think their car plate, SS number, bank account would be comprimised?
If you are not paranoid in this age, youâre not normal. Some fears are justified, they just are. But most people you express this to will call you a scaredy cat, at fault with your own feasome tendencies. Some people sense danger more, think to help others with it, and those others think youâre over-reacting. Causing false alarms.
Hey, if you can figure out a way to overhaul society that will eliminate depression and kill the apocalypse, iâm all for it, but iâm not going to hold my breath . . .
The solutions are available. Iâve spent a few years now gathering them into a larger picture, trying to boil things down to precisely the roots of problems (its so easy to confuse them with symptoms in such a complexified world). The problem with implementation are:
-
Getting people to pay attention to you (and the many, many others who are also discovering the paths of cultural revival), and stop paying attention to the phallocratic death-mongers, the bankers, the politicians, and all those people and groups whoâs motives are too damned convoluted to be pure.
-
Getting them to admit that survival will require sacrifice. Our entire notion of âfreedomâ will have to be overhauled. YOU DO NOT HAVE THE FREEDOM TO CONSUME WITH ABANDON. Freedom FROM consumption and the material world in general is the only escape.
Iâve said before on these boards: Conspiracy exists because the motives behind them exist. Allusions to the contrary are naive, childish, and destructive.
A corollary to this theory would run: Conspiracies succeed because you donât believe they exist.
Right, experiencing it, whether the truth exposes it or not, is similar. I agree.
- there is a vast difference between acknowledging that these companies and philosophies have patholgized people who are not ill AND THEN making short term solutions for people who need to live in society as it is now WHILE we work on making these solutions less necessary
AND telling people that they, as an individual, have somethign wrong with their brains. - the medicating of people, especially given the pathologization I mention above WORKS AGAINST making any other changes 3) there are many solutions that psychiatrists tend to avoid prescribing that work as well as their addictive and often expensive solutions but which do not make pharmaceutical companies money.
the reductionist and rather warlike methology and ideology of psychiatric prescribing is a poor general model.
I am not suggesting we take away everyoneâs pills and go cold turkey and see what happens.