| Surely scientists in the pay of big pharma couldn't get this so wrong. 11:05 - Jul 21 with 870 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/jul/20/scientists-question-widespread-u
"Scientists have called into question the widespread use of antidepressants after a major review found “no clear evidence” that low serotonin levels are responsible for depression.
Prescriptions for antidepressants have risen dramatically since the 1990s, with one in six adults and 2% of teenagers in England now being prescribed them. Millions more people around the world regularly use antidepressants."
|  |
| |  |
| Surely scientists in the pay of big pharma couldn't get this so wrong. on 11:10 - Jul 21 with 826 views | mylittletown |
cf cholesterol levels and heart disease. |  | | |
| Surely scientists in the pay of big pharma couldn't get this so wrong. on 11:26 - Jul 21 with 764 views | chicoazul |
Absolutely scandalous. |  |
| |
| Surely scientists in the pay of big pharma couldn't get this so wrong. on 11:28 - Jul 21 with 759 views | DanTheMan |
Interesting study but it already seems somewhat contentious given the comments from even people at the University the study was done.
Probably needs more studies to confirm. For what it's worth I've known multiple people who have been helped by using antidepressants in the short term. Many of them are not even under patent any more so "big pharma" get relatively little out of it. [Post edited 21 Jul 2022 11:30]
|  |
| |
| Surely scientists in the pay of big pharma couldn't get this so wrong. on 11:29 - Jul 21 with 753 views | Keno |
looking at the picture has there been any research on depression and mental disorders being caused by contact to anything that is green and yellow? |  |
| |
| Surely scientists in the pay of big pharma couldn't get this so wrong. on 11:32 - Jul 21 with 747 views | Swansea_Blue |
Does it have to be a 'in the pocket of big pharma' conspiracy? Sounds to me like this is still wide open for further research on why antidepressants have positive impacts, rather than this casting into doubt their effectiveness. Obviously it's important to understand why they're working if it's not directly the serotonin link. The danger with this though, and cherry picking just one line of reasoning in that article, is that it could cause people to abandon their meds with potentially devastating consequences. [Post edited 21 Jul 2022 11:40]
|  |
| |
| Surely scientists in the pay of big pharma couldn't get this so wrong. on 11:34 - Jul 21 with 736 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Surely scientists in the pay of big pharma couldn't get this so wrong. on 11:29 - Jul 21 by Keno |
looking at the picture has there been any research on depression and mental disorders being caused by contact to anything that is green and yellow? |
Yep. Green and yellow has a correlation coefficient with depression of r = 0.85. being managed by someone called Paul is r = 0.98. | |
| |
| Surely scientists in the pay of big pharma couldn't get this so wrong. on 11:36 - Jul 21 with 714 views | giant_stow |
I recognise those green pills
I don’t mind admitting I'm on them for OCD. No one seems to really know why they work for OCD, but in my experience they just work. Like most nutjobs on medication, I often ‘forgot’ to take them, sometimes for a couple of weeks and then I pay the OCD price of more intrusive thoughts — clear as day.
I don’t like being beholden to them, but if I had some life-long physical condition, I wouldn't think twice about taking pills for that.
They are very powerful drugs though for sure and definitely affect mood. I don’t believe that to be some kind of placebo thing either — I’ve been taking these things off and on since uni, so think I’m past that.
All anecdotal granted, but as a person who takes them, I take my experience over a study. |  |
| |
| Surely scientists in the pay of big pharma couldn't get this so wrong. on 11:39 - Jul 21 with 709 views | unbelievablue |
As usual, need more studies.
However, this one isn't calling into question that SSRIs have a positive impact on depressed individuals who take them.
Instead, it's saying we can't be sure that low serotonin is a root cause for depression. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Surely scientists in the pay of big pharma couldn't get this so wrong. on 11:41 - Jul 21 with 695 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Surely scientists in the pay of big pharma couldn't get this so wrong. on 11:32 - Jul 21 by Swansea_Blue |
Does it have to be a 'in the pocket of big pharma' conspiracy? Sounds to me like this is still wide open for further research on why antidepressants have positive impacts, rather than this casting into doubt their effectiveness. Obviously it's important to understand why they're working if it's not directly the serotonin link. The danger with this though, and cherry picking just one line of reasoning in that article, is that it could cause people to abandon their meds with potentially devastating consequences. [Post edited 21 Jul 2022 11:40]
|
I'm not sure it is a conspiracy theory suggest that scientists in the pay of big business might be incentivised towards certain outcomes. The scientist on the telly box says the evidenced results were only marginally better than placebo. My thankfully short lived experience with sri's was that they dulled all thought so were best avoided.
Regarding detox, they are indeed dangerous. | |
| |
| Surely scientists in the pay of big pharma couldn't get this so wrong. on 11:43 - Jul 21 with 694 views | giant_stow |
| Surely scientists in the pay of big pharma couldn't get this so wrong. on 11:39 - Jul 21 by unbelievablue |
As usual, need more studies.
However, this one isn't calling into question that SSRIs have a positive impact on depressed individuals who take them.
Instead, it's saying we can't be sure that low serotonin is a root cause for depression. |
Good stats.
One other thing specifically to the OP's big pharma point: fluoxetine (proxac) is out of the copyright (or whatever the drug term is) and can now be made generically - it comes in all sorts of colours. Having had a private prescription years ago, it's actually much cheaper than the cost of the NHS charge, so I don't think its a huge money spinner for drug companies. Or at least not like the latest wonder drugs are. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
