![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]Shown: posts 1 to 25 of 73. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by sandhi on May 16, 2001, at 10:50:38
Nichole, I also came to this board for answer's about an AD I am taking and have really found this board helpful but am gettin a little put out with all the talk about opiates and street drugs. I used to be a sidewalk drug user and believe that is where my problems stem from and wouldn't advise anythin not subscribed and monitered by a doctor. Just because a substance makes you (feel good) doesn't mean it won't kill you mentally and spiritually. I take celexa which was working great until recently and will see my doctor about anothe legitimate solution. Sandhi
Posted by loosmrbls on May 16, 2001, at 12:31:02
In reply to Nichole, I'm with you!!, posted by sandhi on May 16, 2001, at 10:50:38
I don't think there is anyone on the board here that endorses the use of street drugs illegally to solve their problems.
I think the questions stem more from people realizing that certain drugs made them feel "good" or at least "better" and want to know how, pharmacologically, that happened.
And, more importantly, how to recapture that feeling in a prescription drug.
Mood disorders and substance abuse often go hand-in-hand. It's often a question of which one came first.
Absolutely if someone supports the use of illicit street drugs, this should be brought to Dr. Bob's attention.
Posted by rogdog on May 16, 2001, at 15:08:38
In reply to Re: Nichole, I'm with you!!, posted by loosmrbls on May 16, 2001, at 12:31:02
THANK YOU LOOSMRBLS !! VERY WELL PUT. SINCERLY,
ROGDOG
Posted by JahL on May 16, 2001, at 20:21:42
In reply to Re: Nichole, I'm with you!!, posted by rogdog on May 16, 2001, at 15:08:38
> THANK YOU LOOSMRBLS !! VERY WELL PUT. SINCERLY,
> ROGDOGDitto.
j
Posted by SalArmy4me on May 17, 2001, at 1:03:59
In reply to Re: Loos, Rog, I'm with you!!, posted by JahL on May 16, 2001, at 20:21:42
With all the pharmacological alternatives out there for Depression, why must one take Opiates (which are not proven effective by scientific double-blind, placebo-controlled worldwide trials)?
Posted by JahL on May 17, 2001, at 13:33:57
In reply to Sandhi, Loos, Rog, JahL.. I'm with you too » JahL, posted by SalArmy4me on May 17, 2001, at 1:03:59
> > With all the pharmacological alternatives out there for Depression, why must one take Opiates
Some of us get bored of trying drugs that don't work (for us).
Sal, Im only answering this because it's directed @ me. You seem to forget that just because, at will, you can pull out a long list of obscure meds, it doesn't mean you have the answer to every form of depression. You don't.I've tried just about every drug you suggested to Elizabeth (I noted yr lack of reply to her), all the drugs on the list you post on a regular basis, & more besides. No joy. So what gives? You seem to have tried every drug under the sun. How well are you?
How can you possibly discount the idea that the opioid receptor system might in some way be implicated in *some* depressions? Why should opioid receptors be the only ones immune to dysfunction? Where is the medical evidence you are so fond of to substantiate yr (implicitly made) denial of this possibility?
> >(which are not proven effective by scientific double-blind, placebo-controlled worldwide trials)?
Right, & all the suggestions you made to Elizabeth are (for depression)? Are we applying double-standards here?
Why do you think so few studies on the opioids' role in the treatment of depression exist? Govt. agenda & 'abuse-paranoia' (which of course is not entirely misplaced).
Maybe you shld take a break from the medical literature & take a look into the politics behind the approval procedure. Why some drugs make it to mkt & others don't. These decisions are not made only upon efficacy considerations.
I think we've done this to death...
Best Regards,
J.
Posted by Elizabeth on May 17, 2001, at 15:59:08
In reply to Sandhi, Loos, Rog, JahL.. I'm with you too » JahL, posted by SalArmy4me on May 17, 2001, at 1:03:59
> With all the pharmacological alternatives out there for Depression, why must one take Opiates (which are not proven effective by scientific double-blind, placebo-controlled worldwide trials)?
First of all, there are people for whom the standard drugs (many of which work by identical or nearly identical mechanisms) simply do not work, or do not work adequately. This is not common but it does happen and these people are as deserving of compassion effective care as anyone else suffering from a serious illness.
Also, there's ample evidence supporting the efficacy of opioid agonists in depression. See http://balder.prohosting.com/~adhpage/bupe.html and http://www.addict.f2s.com/medarticlemenu.html (all of these articles and letters list references at the end; the first article has a particularly extensive bibliography). In contrast, many of the drugs discussed on this board are completely or relatively experimental (not that I'm objecting to such discussion). The use of opioids for depression or melancholia goes back literally thousands of years. Morphine is one of the few herbal remedies that are actually known to be effective for anything.
Finally, I have seen *nobody* here advocating the use of "street drugs" as antidepressants. This is an accusation that has been tossed around by a number of people who disagree with the use of these drugs as antidepressants. If someone has posted anything recommending "street drugs" please, by all means, repost it or post a link to it.
-elizabeth
Posted by loosmrbls on May 18, 2001, at 8:11:12
In reply to Nichole, I'm with you!!, posted by sandhi on May 16, 2001, at 10:50:38
Indeed, opiate receptors may play a role -- and some people speculate that those who cut themselves do so to release endogenous endorphins and other chemicals that bind to opiate receptors and reduce pain.
THC has also been speculated.
However, I have one question. Has anyone had good, LONG-TERM success with these drugs releiving depression and bringing one into "euthymia" and functionality?
I can only see one road with these drugs: (1) Sedation and at least a mild impairment in daily functioning (2) Tolerance (if not addiction) (3)a large potential for overdose.
My experience has been that these drugs mask, not relieve, depression. And that's only short-term. I hardly see opiates as a life-affirming cure for depression. Ask the Chinese.
Posted by JahL on May 18, 2001, at 11:42:52
In reply to Re: Nichole, I'm with you!!, posted by loosmrbls on May 18, 2001, at 8:11:12
> I can only see one road with these drugs: (1) Sedation and at least a mild impairment in daily functioning (2) Tolerance (if not addiction) (3)a large potential for overdose.Hi Loos. You seem a v. knowledgable chap & I 'm not looking for any kind of argument (gOD it's tense rnd here). The above sounds like a suicidal on TCAs:-)
> My experience has been that these drugs mask, not relieve, depression. And that's only short-term. I hardly see opiates as a life-affirming cure for depression. Ask the Chinese.
Seriously, tho', you're guilty here of what you've (rightly) accused others of doing; generalising YR experience for others. Bad science. If you take a look thru' Medline you will see all sorts of v. esoteric & obscure drugs bringing relief. Generally the subjects of these studies are extremely treatment-resistant & are subsequently unlikely to exhibit placebo effect. The presiding opinion here recently seems to be that unless a drug can 'cure' say, 5% of depressives, it has no merit. Don't the remaining 5% count?
Fwiw I know 2 long-term (2 & 5 yrs), low-dose opioid-users who experience few of the problems you describe, & are damn-near euthymic a lot of the time. More than they wld be on conventional drugs.
I can't speak for the Chinese but then neither can you. We *know* that opioids are very habit-forming for most people (part of the reason Eric's posts are so redundant), but can you prove this is so for all people? This board stands testament to the fact that not all people are alike in their responses to drugs. Coke gets you high? Makes me feel like shit.
I'm trying to keep an open mind...
Sincerely,
J.ps. why do people take issue with my (generally) reasonable posts, yet do not take to task an individual on THIS thread who regularly claims to know all the drugs required for treating depression, that ALL Bipolar can be cured by 4 existing MSs, & who regularly *encourages* people, w/o the knowledge of their doc, to purchase drugs in Mexico?
Not aimed @ you Marbs, but a lot of posts recently seem to be agenda-driven. My only agenda is to get well.
PPS. I've just noticed you. Good to see someone else (not me) is trying to fill the 'expertise vacuum'. :-)
Posted by shelliR on May 18, 2001, at 11:52:47
In reply to Re: Nichole, I'm with you!!, posted by loosmrbls on May 18, 2001, at 8:11:12
>
> My experience <Do you have experience using opiates as an antidepressant? (Sincere question)
>has been that these drugs mask, not relieve, depression. <
I think actually this is the most interesting of your points. I think the operant word that is missing is curing. Neither ads nor opiates used as ads cure depression.
So what exactly is the difference between masking and relieving depression? When nardil was working for me, I did not feel very much depression. Yet when I went off the nardil, the depression returned in full force. So is that masking or relieving? And what would be the difference? Really curious.
shelli
Posted by shelliR on May 18, 2001, at 12:10:01
In reply to Re: Nichole, I'm with you!!, posted by loosmrbls on May 18, 2001, at 8:11:12
loosmrbls,
> My experience has been that these drugs mask, not relieve, depression.
Okay, maybe this is your point. Like if you're depressed and go out and drink every night, then the next day you are still depressed--perhaps even more so (rebound effect). Is that what you mean? For one night your depression is masked? But if you took an ad, your depression would be relieved.
Yes, I guess I could see that someone could use opiates in that way. But also, there is another way--basically taking them like ads. No real difference from other drugs in relieving depression.
Sorry, I didn't really mean to ask the question and then answer it, but it came to me what you might mean only after I had submitted the first post.
So, that saves you some time, right? Feel free to amend.
Shelli
Posted by Elizabeth on May 18, 2001, at 20:26:42
In reply to Re: Nichole, I'm with you!!, posted by loosmrbls on May 18, 2001, at 8:11:12
> Indeed, opiate receptors may play a role -- and some people speculate that those who cut themselves do so to release endogenous endorphins and other chemicals that bind to opiate receptors and reduce pain.
Yes. Someone I know who is a "cutter" says that naltrexone has helped her tremendously with that problem. In contrast, people with uncomplicated depression often seem to find naltrexone either neutral or dysphoric.
> However, I have one question. Has anyone had good, LONG-TERM success with these drugs releiving depression and bringing one into "euthymia" and functionality?
I know someone who took Ultram daily for several months and did not increase the dose. My pdoc has used morphine and buprenorphine as ADs with no dosage increase required. I've been taking buprenorphine for 2 years (though not continuously) and for as long as about six months at a stretch. And get a load of this (this is an excerpt from a letter to the editor published in the American Journal of Psychiatry):
"This report describes three patients with chronic and refractory major depression who were treated with the µ-opiate agonists oxycodone or oxymorphone. All three patients experienced a sustained moderate to marked antidepressant effect from the opiates. The patients described a reduction in psychic pain and distress, much as they would describe the analgesic effects of opiates in treating nocioceptive pain.
"...None of the patients abused the opiates, developed tolerance, or started using illicit substances.
"We used oxycodone in three additional patients without histories of opiate abuse. In two of these three patients, oxycodone produced a similar sustained antidepressant effect. ... Opiates should be considered a reasonable option in carefully selected patients who are desperately ill with major depression that is refractory to standard therapies."
(Am J Psychiatry 156:2017, December 1999. Treatment Augmentation With Opiates in Severe and Refractory Major Depression. Andrew L. Stoll, MD, and Stephanie Rueter, BA.)
Stoll is a very well-respected researcher at HMS. (Yes, he's also the fish oil guy.)
> I can only see one road with these drugs: (1) Sedation and at least a mild impairment in daily functioning (2) Tolerance (if not addiction) (3) a large potential for overdose.
(1) I find them activating, not sedating. (2) As noted above, a lot of the case reports I've heard/read about suggest that tolerance doesn't always occur and may be the exception rather than the rule. (3) The overdose potential is the biggest problem, IMO. This is an advantage of buprenorphine: it is virtually impossible to kill yourself by ODing on it (because it has a ceiling effect).
> My experience has been that these drugs mask, not relieve, depression.
Can you explain what you feel the difference is? To me it's mostly a matter of time course.
-elizabeth
Posted by Elizabeth on May 18, 2001, at 20:34:09
In reply to Re: 1 person's view. » loosmrbls, posted by JahL on May 18, 2001, at 11:42:52
> We *know* that opioids are very habit-forming for most people
I don't think it's even most people -- only about 30% of people who try opioids find them pleasant.
> This board stands testament to the fact that not all people are alike in their responses to drugs.
*Oh yeah*. Most people assume that opioids are simply CNS depressants. In fact they have excitatory properties as well. For me, these are more pronounced: opioids are activating. The sedation is something that people generally adjust to; it isn't a problem in the long term.
The comparison to tricyclics is an apt one. In particular, they have similar typical side effect profiles. Tricyclics are more cardiotoxic, though, whereas opioids cause more respiratory depression. (Either can be lethal in overdose.)
> Coke gets you high? Makes me feel like shit.
I've never had any interest in it. It sounds like a horrible drug. A milder, longer-lasting, truly nonselective monoamine reuptake inhibitor might be a positive thing, though, if such a drug were available.
-elizabeth
Posted by Kristi on May 19, 2001, at 3:35:35
In reply to Re: 1 person's view., posted by Elizabeth on May 18, 2001, at 20:34:09
I think I have the wrong post but the right thread. anyway.... do you know what dosage of ultram a doc may put a mildly depressed person on?
> > We *know* that opioids are very habit-forming for most people
>
> I don't think it's even most people -- only about 30% of people who try opioids find them pleasant.
>
> > This board stands testament to the fact that not all people are alike in their responses to drugs.
>
> *Oh yeah*. Most people assume that opioids are simply CNS depressants. In fact they have excitatory properties as well. For me, these are more pronounced: opioids are activating. The sedation is something that people generally adjust to; it isn't a problem in the long term.
>
> The comparison to tricyclics is an apt one. In particular, they have similar typical side effect profiles. Tricyclics are more cardiotoxic, though, whereas opioids cause more respiratory depression. (Either can be lethal in overdose.)
>
> > Coke gets you high? Makes me feel like shit.
>
> I've never had any interest in it. It sounds like a horrible drug. A milder, longer-lasting, truly nonselective monoamine reuptake inhibitor might be a positive thing, though, if such a drug were available.
>
> -elizabeth
Posted by Elizabeth on May 19, 2001, at 14:28:29
In reply to Re: 1 person's view.-elizabeith, posted by Kristi on May 19, 2001, at 3:35:35
> I think I have the wrong post but the right thread. anyway.... do you know what dosage of ultram a doc may put a mildly depressed person on?
I don't know how much you would need for mild depression (and I'd think that regular ADs would be more suited to mild depression, in any case), but the dose is almost always restricted to at most 400 mg/day. This usually means 50-100 mg every 4-6 hours.
-e
Posted by Kristi on May 19, 2001, at 14:50:22
In reply to Ultram dose » Kristi, posted by Elizabeth on May 19, 2001, at 14:28:29
Thanks. AD's just mess me up so bad. I seem to only get the side effects that happen to take away things I enjoy..... ie... sleep, sex, energy, etc.
> > I think I have the wrong post but the right thread. anyway.... do you know what dosage of ultram a doc may put a mildly depressed person on?
>
> I don't know how much you would need for mild depression (and I'd think that regular ADs would be more suited to mild depression, in any case), but the dose is almost always restricted to at most 400 mg/day. This usually means 50-100 mg every 4-6 hours.
>
> -e
Posted by loosmrbls on May 21, 2001, at 8:42:01
In reply to Re: Ultram dose » Elizabeth, posted by Kristi on May 19, 2001, at 14:50:22
I appreciate that we can discuss this topic without it getting nasty.
I admit that most of my opinion about opiate drugs and depression comes from personal experience and is therefore limited.
One thing I want to describe is what I mean by "relieve" and "mask."
By "relieve" I did kind of mean cure, because antidepressant drugs are/were designed to correct chemical imbalances in the brain (monoamines -- dopamine/serotonin/norepinephrine) that are believed to play a primary role in the symptoms (if not cause) of depression. That would be a cure. Many people eventually come off of AD's without a recurrence of symptoms and never have another problem (I have a friend like that who took Zoloft). But obviously he does not represent the users of this forum.
By "mask" I mean induce a sense of euphoria -- much like alcohol does -- that does not address the problem but hides it. Just like opiates do not "cure" the cause of pain (like a broken bone) but "mask" the pain.
So in that sense, AD's "cure" depression (in theory) by working on the primary cause, while opiates "mask" it by relieving the pain.
Now, the arguement is can opiates "cure" depression -- can dysregulation in opiate receptors cause depression?
I admit it is entirely possible, if only in a small percentage of those depressed. I, like many people here, have suffered from a mood disorder for years (3), have been on multiple antidepressants with no success (often worsening), multiple mood stabilizers, and nothing has worked thus far.
I have cut myself only once in my life during a very bad depressive episode, have never felt the need to since. Someone mentioned naltrexone helping them -- I find that fascinating because naltrexone actually blocks opiate receptors, in effect "shutting down" the opiate pathways. This would actually suggest opiate excess.
And I know there are multiple subtypes of opiate receptors (at least four) and people respond differently to these drugs. My wife, for example, often gets nauseous and vomits at even a small dose.
While I have taken 120-180mg of codeine and noticed only a mildly calming effect.
OK, sorry for the long post. After three years of dealing with depression, I am coming to believe that "depression" is like a "fever", a common symptom (or syndrome) that can occur from any dysfunction of a chemical pathway within the brain -- and certainly opiate pathways can be one of them.
Thanks for the article citations.
Posted by dougb on May 21, 2001, at 10:12:06
In reply to Sandhi, Loos, Rog, JahL.. I'm with you too » JahL, posted by SalArmy4me on May 17, 2001, at 1:03:59
> With all the pharmacological alternatives out there for Depression, why must one take Opiates (which are not proven effective by scientific double-blind, placebo-controlled worldwide trials)?
Sal:
What is your bias? What is your agenda?Everytime i was put one of 'all the pharm alternatives' my life would be turned upside down yet again for weeks if not months, frequently to the point of desperation.
I do not know how _your_ body chemistry/illness works, maybe for you switching meds is like changing clothes.
Tempus Fugit. If something works for someone who is ill, why fool around with anything else.
Most of us had a life before depression and am sure that all of us just want to get back to that life and not spend the rest of our existence in some obscenely expensive exsperimental treadmill where we eventually try 'all of those alternatives'
How safe do you think it is to be introducing substance after substance into your system?
These drugs have not been tested or approved for long term use by themselves let alone in the psycho-brew du jour.
db
Posted by gilbert on May 21, 2001, at 19:01:56
In reply to Re: Sal, where are you coming from? » SalArmy4me, posted by dougb on May 21, 2001, at 10:12:06
It has been my experience as a recovering addict and as someone who suffers from panic disorder that my search for the perfect AD or benzo has been much like my search for the perfect high used to be. I am never really satisfied with the effects of being stoned and out of it but don't really want to cope with reality 24/7. The huge difference for me has been whether drinking or using street drugs did bring relief from panic and depression but not without phenomenom of craving kicking in where I wanted more all the time. Now maybe non addicts would use let's say heroin medicinally. I believe that there may be that small percentage of people out there who could. But for most the phenonenom of craving kicks in and you need more an more of the drug until finally you are willing to sell your mom for it. I have never had this craving on antidepressants or even benzos for that matter. I never want to pop an extra prozac or xanax and travel uptown to chase skirt. Now the other side of the coin is at best these meds seem to make life tolerable. The benzos make you overly laid back and life is somewhat dulled. The antidepressants make you a robot and steal your libido. So whether or not you ingest illegal or legal subtsances they all come with a price. Even though I have been sober for 15 years and have only ingested drugs that are prescribed and approved by the almighty sanctifying easily bought F.D.A. I have felt some side effects that I never had to feel on street drugs. I still feel I am better off being a guinea pig with legal substances where quantities and quality is somewhat controlled. But it seems to me from reading this board and from my own experience we are all scurrying from one drug to another in hopes of finding something that will give us that glimpse of happiness that may not actually exist. This may be as good as it gets.
Gil
Posted by Elizabeth on May 21, 2001, at 20:21:18
In reply to Re: Ultram dose, posted by loosmrbls on May 21, 2001, at 8:42:01
> One thing I want to describe is what I mean by "relieve" and "mask."
>
> By "relieve" I did kind of mean cure, because antidepressant drugs are/were designed to correct chemical imbalances in the brain (monoamines -- dopamine/serotonin/norepinephrine) that are believed to play a primary role in the symptoms (if not cause) of depression.The belief you mention resulted from the fact that monoaminergic drugs (tricyclics and MAOIs) are antidepressants. The AD effects of tricyclics and MAOIs were discovered by accident; these drugs certainly weren't designed to treat depression. Their pharmacological actions were discovered later; this resulted in a search for other drugs with similar or related pharmacological actions. The newer ADs were selected for study as potential ADs based on their pharmacological effects, which were similar to those of known antidepressants.
> That would be a cure. Many people eventually come off of AD's without a recurrence of symptoms and never have another problem (I have a friend like that who took Zoloft). But obviously he does not represent the users of this forum.
I've known some people like that. In general they had a single episode of mild or moderate depression.
> By "mask" I mean induce a sense of euphoria -- much like alcohol does -- that does not address the problem but hides it. Just like opiates do not "cure" the cause of pain (like a broken bone) but "mask" the pain.
I see. I don't think this is applicable, in my case anyway. I don't feel euphoric or intoxicated on opioids at any dose I have taken. (I don't take large amounts by any standard.) It is true that some people try to "mask" depression with sedatives such as alcohol or benzodiazepines
> So in that sense, AD's "cure" depression (in theory) by working on the primary cause, while opiates "mask" it by relieving the pain.
Monoaminergic ADs relieve depression for as long as you're taking them. About 50% of people who experience a major depressive episode will not suffer any recurrences, so the fact that some people do not relapse after going off ADs doesn't mean that they were truly "cured" by the ADs (since they might not have relapsed anyway).
> I, like many people here, have suffered from a mood disorder for years (3), have been on multiple antidepressants with no success (often worsening), multiple mood stabilizers, and nothing has worked thus far.
I think that as long as we keep looking for new ADs that are similar to the ones we already have, we will never find one that is truly novel and that will work for those who have found no relief elsewhere.
> I have cut myself only once in my life during a very bad depressive episode, have never felt the need to since.
Out of curiosity -- did you experience relief the one time you did cut yourself? Can you say what led you to do it?
> Someone mentioned naltrexone helping them -- I find that fascinating because naltrexone actually blocks opiate receptors, in effect "shutting down" the opiate pathways. This would actually suggest opiate excess.
It could be that when they take naltrexone, these people no longer experience relief when they cut, so they stop doing it. Another possibility is that naltrexone prevents dissociation, which may be associated with or lead to cutting. I would be curious to hear from anyone who has used naltrexone as a treatment for self-injurious behaviour and might be able to shed some light on how it works.
> And I know there are multiple subtypes of opiate receptors (at least four) and people respond differently to these drugs.
There are three subtypes -- mu, kappa, and delta. ("Sigma" receptors were at one point thought to be opioid receptors; they turned out to be something else.)
> OK, sorry for the long post. After three years of dealing with depression, I am coming to believe that "depression" is like a "fever", a common symptom (or syndrome) that can occur from any dysfunction of a chemical pathway within the brain -- and certainly opiate pathways can be one of them.
I wouldn't go that far, but I'm sure there are multiple possible causes.
-elizabeth
Posted by shelliR on May 21, 2001, at 22:09:12
In reply to relieve vs. mask » loosmrbls, posted by Elizabeth on May 21, 2001, at 20:21:18
>
> > Someone mentioned naltrexone helping them -- I find that fascinating because naltrexone actually blocks opiate receptors, in effect "shutting down" the opiate pathways. This would actually suggest opiate excess.
>
> It could be that when they take naltrexone, these people no longer experience relief when they cut, so they stop doing it. Another possibility is that naltrexone prevents dissociation, which may be associated with or lead to cutting. I would be curious to hear from anyone who has used naltrexone as a treatment for self-injurious behaviour and might be able to shed some light on how it works.Elizabeth, I think your first thought was the correct one, based on the view of my friend's therapist who is an expert on dissociation and drug abuse. He gave her naltrexone because cutting actually can create a high. Naltrexone was given to her in the same way as to any drug abuser--to stop the high. Only she liked the feeling of cutting, therefore would not take the pill so I don't know what the result would really have been. She cut often, but not at all deep.
My therapist gave me naltrexone to supplement my nardil--she thought it might be successful because it had some of the properties of opiates. Well, for me it had all the bad properties. I felt drugged--in the same way as if I had taken too much hydrocodone, slightly nauseated, and very depressed. Only one of my forty-five or so trials. And a short one!
Shelli
Posted by dougb on May 22, 2001, at 13:43:26
In reply to Re: Sal, where are you coming from?, posted by gilbert on May 21, 2001, at 19:01:56
> Now the other side of the coin is at best these meds seem to make life tolerable.
--- Tolerable seems like a depressing destination, but i think that many on ads are not even to this low target, thus major depressions inexcusable mortality rate.> I still feel I am better off being a guinea pig with legal substances where quantities and quality is somewhat controlled.
--- Of course with some of these substances, that may be like saying: I get my toxic preparations sans impurities> But it seems to me from reading this board and from my own experience we are all scurrying from one drug to another in hopes of finding something that will give us that glimpse of happiness that may not actually exist. This may be as good as it gets.
--- Can not agree here, everyone here pays a very high price, in dollars, wasted productivity, lost moments with family and friends.This price is being paid month in month out, and we are paying for only one thing: Relief from illness.
We are not getting what we paid for, else we would not be here.
As we do not get what we pay for, we should not be charged for what we are not receiving.
Furthermore, as the pharmaceutical and medical communities are making such excessive profits elseware, there should be an adjustment for failure to perform.
I have not seen the figures but multiply a few million sufferers by $200-600 per month for a few pennies worth of chemicals, now mix in a visit to your pdoc every X.
Can you spell @#@$*!! < -- add your own expeletive (exploitedtive) here.
Now, we are expected to believe that 'maybe it just doesn't get any better'?
db
Posted by gilbert on May 22, 2001, at 15:45:37
In reply to Re: It doesn't get any better than this? » gilbert, posted by dougb on May 22, 2001, at 13:43:26
Db,
I agree and I just left my pdoc's this morning we are basically out of options as far as meds to try. We have definitely put mental health issues at the bottom of the priority list as far as research and new effective tolerable drugs seem ions away. Look at the cardiac side of the medical business they have come up with wonderfull drugs for hypertension and cholesterol that have very few side effects and seem to get the job done. Mentally ill people are not only more expendable according to society and the medical field but their suffering and conditions seem to take on a last priority status. So touchee I agree with your outlook my cynicism grows with each visit to the pdocs. The amazing thing from reading these boards is so many of us myself included keep hoping and trying different meds with childlike trust in the established medical profession only to be let down once more by some half effective product with side effects worse than the symptomolgy itself.thanks,
Gil
Posted by stjames on May 22, 2001, at 17:47:21
In reply to Re: It doesn't get any better than this? » gilbert, posted by dougb on May 22, 2001, at 13:43:26
> > But it seems to me from reading this board and from my own experience we are all scurrying from one drug to another in hopes of finding something that will give us that glimpse of happiness that may not actually exist. This may be as good as it gets.
james here....
Nope, I have been 100 % for 18 yrs on AD's.
James
Posted by JahL on May 22, 2001, at 19:52:09
In reply to Re: It doesn't get any better than this? » gilbert, posted by dougb on May 22, 2001, at 13:43:26
> > But it seems to me from reading this board and from my own experience we are all scurrying from one drug to another in hopes of finding something that will give us that glimpse of happiness that may not actually exist. This may be as good as it gets.> Now, we are expected to believe that 'maybe it just doesn't get any better'?
Brief AD-induced euthymia taught me 'happiness' (ie feeling normal/alive/human, whatever) *does* exist &, given an excellent pdoc who's prepared to push the envelope, plus a good dose of fortune, is theoretically attainable. Believe me, it's worth going thru' all this sh*t to escape a living death & rejoin the human race.
Doug, you're so right about the price we all pay, but you omitted to mention that a significant few pay the highest price...
J.
(you listen to that Hicks stuff?)
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.