![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]Shown: posts 26 to 50 of 53. Go back in thread:
Posted by morganator on April 8, 2010, at 17:53:24
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms, posted by bleauberry on April 8, 2010, at 17:46:50
I totally agree with you here. Like I said before, the only reason why I made the original post was for people taking Zoloft or thinking of taking Zoloft to know that there may be a benefit to taking it outside of just fighting depression and anxiety. I think it is important for people that need to take antidepressants to have reasons to feel good about having to take them.
Posted by topcatclr on April 8, 2010, at 23:08:27
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms » bleauberry, posted by morganator on April 8, 2010, at 17:53:24
Linkadge,
You have been on this sight for years, literally talking yourself and many others, into some sort of bizarre permanent depression. Yes i know all the risks and i have done more than my share of analyzing. You, however, take it to an extreme, unhealthy level, virtually guaranteeing your failure. I don't need to know every freaken chemical structure of these meds. Christ there are chemicals EVERYWHERE! I have come to the simple conclusion that my life is better with them than without them. Why do you want to bring everyone down the hole with you!
Posted by Sigismund on April 9, 2010, at 1:12:37
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms » bleauberry, posted by morganator on April 8, 2010, at 17:53:24
Coca leaf, though full of antioxidants, is a plant of the devil and a med choice I am fortunately not permitted.
Posted by Dr. Bob on April 9, 2010, at 1:53:19
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms/ Linkadge, posted by topcatclr on April 8, 2010, at 23:08:27
> You have been ... talking yourself and many others, into some sort of bizarre permanent depression.
Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused.
But please don't take this personally, either, this doesn't mean I don't like you or think you're a bad person, and I'm sorry if this hurts you.
I do hope that you choose to remain a member of this community and that this community helps you, if needed, to avoid future blocks.
Link, I'm also sorry if you felt hurt.
More information about posting policies and tips on alternative ways to express oneself, including a link to a nice post by Dinah on I-statements, are in the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforceFollow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by morganator on April 9, 2010, at 3:30:27
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms, posted by Sigismund on April 9, 2010, at 1:12:37
> Coca leaf, though full of antioxidants, is a plant of the devil and a med choice I am fortunately not permitted.
Huh? Can you please elucidate?
Are you talking about cocoa?
I put raw cacao in my protein smoothie everyday. It's very good for you, unless you have an allergy to it of course.
Posted by Sigismund on April 9, 2010, at 18:16:51
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms » Sigismund, posted by morganator on April 9, 2010, at 3:30:27
I lapse into irony when annoyed by defenders of the industry.
No, I was talking about coca leaf.
Posted by linkadge on April 9, 2010, at 18:21:24
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms » linkadge, posted by bulldog2 on April 8, 2010, at 16:39:06
>Zoloft has virtually no effect on weight, some >action on dopamine, one of the lowest ssri >offenders on prolactin, pristine and clean of >action, catapult zoloft into the group of the >best of the modern ssri, snri ads. Certainly one >of the first ads that should be considered for >mild to moderate depression. Just an opinion >held down at the mental health clinic of the >University of Pennsylvania.
I'm not even going to respond to that. It sounds like the title slogan on Pfizer's mid 90's magazine campaign. Sure you're not getting funding from Pfizer?
Linkadge
Posted by linkadge on April 9, 2010, at 18:34:32
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms » linkadge, posted by morganator on April 8, 2010, at 17:05:58
I took 175mg for about 8 months (and other doses for varying lengths).
I had side effects. Zoloft made me suicidal and, apathetic. It gave me mood swings, and strange dark moods (which I never got on citalopram). It increased carbohydrate cravings. It made it hard to sit still (akathesia), insomnia (on over 100mg). Sertaline also made me paranoid (which other SSRI's did not - dopamine reuptake inhibition??). Sertaline also messed up my ballance more than other SSRI's.
Here is a study of SSRI's and risks for cholesterol and obdomnial obesity.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17194277
I think sertaline has few side effects, but (like most SSRI's) its not much better than placebo for lifting moods.
Linkadge
Posted by linkadge on April 9, 2010, at 18:36:49
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms, posted by bleauberry on April 8, 2010, at 17:46:50
I can't agree with you more about the diet / cancer link. I think people want to try and reduce their fears of cancer to easily controlable things like which pill they pop, intead of making the tough choices about food and exercise.
Linkadge
Posted by linkadge on April 9, 2010, at 18:41:44
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms/ Linkadge, posted by topcatclr on April 8, 2010, at 23:08:27
>You have been on this sight for years, literally >talking yourself and many others, into some sort >of bizarre permanent depression.I'm not in a permanent depression.
>You, however, take it to an extreme, unhealthy >level, virtually guaranteeing your failure.
WTF man? I think you are taking what I have said the wrong way. I am just trying to combat "false senses of security". People come on this site which the most bizzare and illogical reasons for wanting this medication or that. I'm just trying to point out logic that I think is flawed.
>Christ there are chemicals EVERYWHERE! I have >come to the simple conclusion that my life is >better with them than without them. Why do you >want to bring everyone down the hole with you!Well, then don't open my posts, I don't really care. Whatever keeps you is a positive mindframe.
Linkadge
Posted by linkadge on April 9, 2010, at 18:56:41
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms, posted by linkadge on April 9, 2010, at 18:21:24
Just an opinion >held down at the mental health clinic of the >University of Pennsylvania.
These people factor the effectiveness compared to relative side effect burden. Effexor, is still arguably more effective than sertaline - however it doesn't rank as high with this U on account of side effect profile.
Analysis can be used to reach any conclusion. Sertaline is just one of those drugs that you can prescribe to the masses without much problem. When U of P recomends sertaline, perhaps (because most SSRI's these days are prescribed for mild / moderate depression) sertaline just fills a needed gap of a placebo like drug which doctors can prescribe without too many inherent risks.
Perhaps it has some positive benefit (in some clinical trials) which seperates it from placebo.
Keep in mind, if active placebos perform better than placebos which perform better than SSRI's, then ideally you want a placebo with the fewest side effects.Most clinical trials find antidepressants roughly equivalant (to themselves and placebo) in terms of efficacy. Why did sertaline and citalopram come out ahead of the others in this analysis?? Its simple - lower side effects.
If you can't make the drugs more effective, at least you can make them more tollerable.
If recomendations were to be made for the treatment of severe depression, things might be radically different.
Linkadge
Posted by morganator on April 9, 2010, at 19:19:52
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms » morganator, posted by Sigismund on April 9, 2010, at 18:16:51
Do you mean defenders of the pharmaceutical industry?
Posted by morganator on April 9, 2010, at 19:22:29
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms, posted by linkadge on April 9, 2010, at 18:21:24
Zoloft is one of the least likely SSRIs to affect prolactin. Are you going to respond to that? You still have not responded to my posts. You have yet to give me any sources and evidence I requested. Do you have them?
Posted by Sigismund on April 9, 2010, at 19:26:54
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms » Sigismund, posted by morganator on April 9, 2010, at 19:19:52
That and psychiatry, basically.
Posted by morganator on April 9, 2010, at 19:44:50
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms » linkadge, posted by morganator on April 9, 2010, at 19:22:29
OOps you gave me one study. Thanks. Yeah I have heard about people having a similar reaction to Zoloft. Man you took it for a long time for you to have never felt better on it.
If you believe that SSRIs are that powerful and can mess with someone's brain chemistry adversely, doesn't it make sense that they are powerful enough to affect people in positive ways that are much greater than placebo? I don't buy these studies on SSRIs and not being much better than placebo. Are these studies done for several years or just a few months? I think just a few months. So isn't it very possible that this placebo effect would where off and the effect from the SSRIs would continue? I want to see longer studies.
Posted by SLS on April 9, 2010, at 23:20:52
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms, posted by morganator on April 8, 2010, at 13:35:11
Fruits and Vegetables Have Only Weak Effect in Cancer Prevention
Zosia Chustecka
April 8, 2010 Eating more fruits and vegetables has only a modest effect on reducing the risk of developing any cancer, a new study reports. But the public health message to eat more fruits and vegetables still holds, because of benefits to cardiovascular health, say experts.
The finding was reported online April 6 in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, and comes from the massive European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study, which involved 478,478 people followed for a median of 8.7 years."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20371762
Posted by morganator on April 9, 2010, at 23:51:19
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms, posted by SLS on April 9, 2010, at 23:20:52
I think supplements like resveratrol and curcumin will turn out to have much more powerful anti-cancer properties.
Posted by bulldog2 on April 10, 2010, at 9:22:35
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms, posted by bleauberry on April 8, 2010, at 17:46:50
> As far as I can tell, the best anti-cancer strategies are found in the fingertips...which foods are picked up at the grocery store and which are not.
>
> The next step is a few well chosen herbs with clinical evidence supporting them.
>
> If someone happens to be on an antidepressant that happens to have some suspected anticancer benefit as well, cool, an added bonus. But by itself, not a good reason to have that med as your only weapon for good health. The grocery store is where it's at. Food choice is so much more important than most people realize. In terms of anticancer, I would bet regular consumption of raw broccoli, garlic, daily oatmeal, and a full menu of veggies and fruits, ingredient labels that you can actually read and you know what they are, organic meats, these things will blow zoloft in the weeds.
While these natural foods have a powerful potential for being natural medicine if used the wrong way they have the ability to harm and cause disease. After having studied under Michio Kuchi the Macrobiotic Way you would understand you just cannot eat a hodge podge of healthy foods. There has to be a strict balancing of ying and yang. Even good natural foods have to be treated like powerful drugs and not just eaten willy nilly. If you become to ying or yang there can be terrible results. (cancer, heart disease etc). So you need to study the principles or ying and yang and know how to apply them to your body. Your diet has to be based on wether you are to ying or yang and the diet has to be designed to balance your spirit. You may need a professional to diagnose and design a diet for you. The macrobiotic way rarely allows the use of herbs!! They can be very poisonous to the body. Use foods to cure yourself and the principles of ying and yang. People that are ying tend to be weak, feel chilly and also a shallow pulse. A weak damp condition. People that are yang are overheated, tend to have high blood pressure, are aggressive and are very contracted as opposed to the ying condition. You need to pick foods that have the opposite properties of your condition to bring you to balance.
Posted by linkadge on April 10, 2010, at 10:11:19
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms » linkadge, posted by morganator on April 9, 2010, at 19:22:29
Well, I don't see that I have avoided your posts.
Sertaline may have a lower risk of prolactin elevations. Like other SSRI's, I think it can still cause prolactin elevations however.
"Some drugs are clearly associated with an increased risk of hyperprolactinaemia... sertraline (OR = 15.74; IC 95%: 5.80-42.75)...".
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12942857
Some others.
http://direct.bl.uk/bld/PlaceOrder.do?UIN=163963757&ETOC=RN&from=searchengine
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/klu/213/2004/00000171/00000004/art00012
Posted by linkadge on April 10, 2010, at 10:15:23
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms, posted by morganator on April 9, 2010, at 19:44:50
>I don't buy these studies on SSRIs and not being >much better than placebo.
Unfortunately, the SSRI vs. placebo debate is fueled more than just a handful of studies.
Linkadge
Posted by linkadge on April 10, 2010, at 10:16:52
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms, posted by SLS on April 9, 2010, at 23:20:52
"478,478 people followed for a median of 8.7 years."
8.7 years. Nice try.
Linkadge
Posted by SLS on April 10, 2010, at 10:53:44
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms » SLS, posted by linkadge on April 10, 2010, at 10:16:52
> "478,478 people followed for a median of 8.7 years."
>
> 8.7 years. Nice try.
>
> Linkadge
Try what?I think it would have been nicer to report the mean and range rather than the median, but I don't know enough about the usage of statistics in this type of study to understand their significance. The application of logic and common sense does not guarantee accuracy. Empirical investigations can serve to test the logic of hypotheses and the validity of the information they are based upon. Perhaps Morganator is on the right track in identifying the need for a concentrated source of those substances that might act as cancer preventatives. How many red grapes can one eat?
- Scott
Posted by bulldog2 on April 10, 2010, at 11:46:59
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms, posted by SLS on April 10, 2010, at 10:53:44
> > "478,478 people followed for a median of 8.7 years."
> >
> > 8.7 years. Nice try.
> >
> > Linkadge
>
>
> Try what?
>
> I think it would have been nicer to report the mean and range rather than the median, but I don't know enough about the usage of statistics in this type of study to understand their significance. The application of logic and common sense does not guarantee accuracy. Empirical investigations can serve to test the logic of hypotheses and the validity of the information they are based upon. Perhaps Morganator is on the right track in identifying the need for a concentrated source of those substances that might act as cancer preventatives. How many red grapes can one eat?
>
>
> - ScottBingo as usual you hit it right on the head. It's hard to find the truth when you bring an agenda to the table. You seem to just look for the pure truth which leads more often than not to untainted answers.
Posted by Brainbeard on April 11, 2010, at 5:56:31
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms » linkadge, posted by bulldog2 on April 8, 2010, at 16:39:06
> Zoloft has virtually no effect on weight, some action on dopamine, one of the lowest ssri offenders on prolactin
Both studies on which these assumptions are based are flawed for the same reason that most med studies are flawed: they are short-term. In everyday life, sertraline (Zoloft) causes weight gain in the long run just like any other SSRI, although paroxetine (Paxil) is the worst offender. SSRI weight gain often happens in the long term, sometimes only after as long as a year of use has passed.
There is also more than enough evidence that sertraline increases prolactin levels.
Something else: the one SSRI that increases melatonin levels instead of decreasing them is fluvoxamine (Luvox). It does this by severe CYP 1A2 inhibition; this enzyme group is reponsible for the breakdown of melatonin.
Posted by Phillipa on April 11, 2010, at 20:16:17
In reply to Re: Zoloft-Anti-Cancer Mechanisms, posted by Brainbeard on April 11, 2010, at 5:56:31
Your're kidding bet that is why luvox never had any side effects for me? Phillipa
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.