Dear Folks,

The uptake of psychiatric (psychotropic) drugs among Americans, and probably the world, has exploded in recent decades.

And yet, the Sanity-Quotient around the world, not to mention the Happiness-Quotient, seems to be falling.

We all realize that there truly is NO Psychotropic Drug which does not gradually lose its efficacy, over time.  And, there are many psychiatric drugs which become rapidly ineffective over short time intervals.

Some might say that “psychiatric drugs” have caused the general population to become crazier than what we might have expected if there were no psych pharmaceuticals being advertised and sold.

We also know that the relative benefit, even if one can assume that there might be a benefit, of most psychiatric drugs, long-term, is in the single digits of a percent.

Therefore, why do doctors prescribe them?

Here is a vid which might shed light on what most of us already know.

https://youtu.be/WoS9dIjLFv8

(Please see following "comment" for the video which was intended to be attached here, to the OP. Thank you.)

Why do people take such a risk of taking psychotropic drugs…long-term?

We all know, and the pharmaceutical companies know, for sure, that the brain compensates for long-term use of psychotropic drugs through neuroadaptation, which is the process of altering the brain’s physical and chemical structures to restore internal balance. The brain achieves this by changing receptor sensitivity, modifying neurotransmitter production, and shifting synaptic connectivity.

Big Pharma knows this….full well.  And so, what is going on?

Are they crazy?

Best regards,

Gamma

Edited 1 hour ago1 hr by GammaGlobulin

This video was intended to be included with the OP.

(bug not yet fixed, apparently)

Edited 1 hour ago1 hr by GammaGlobulin

The only person to highlight the impact of these drugs on a national stage was RFK Jr. But, MSM and others who are on these drugs were quick to criticize that man.

Look up Columbine to understand how dangerous these drugs are.

Also, one day it will come out that the spike in suicides amongst the US Military men were due to the increase prescription of those drugs.

8 minutes ago, Taboo2 said:

The only person to highlight the impact of these drugs on a national stage was RFK Jr. But, MSM and others who are on these drugs were quick to criticize that man.

Look up Columbine to understand how dangerous these drugs are.

Also, one day it will come out that the spike in suicides amongst the US Military men were due to the increase prescription of those drugs.

Anyone who tells the truth, or attempts to shut down the Big Pharma Pushers will be politically dead in the water.

And, who are the ones who are paying the price?

This is a true joke, since, way back in the early 60s, we already understood the mechanisms of homeostasis, and the fact that the brain will always compensate for any externally applied chemical insult.

Big Tobacco, all over again.

Nobody ever tells the truth.

The wrong medicine can make things worse for patients. The right ones have saved thousands of lives. Constant monitoring, which some doctors fail to do, is a major problem. Reducing depression symptoms, which is their intent, can make a person easier to cope with daily life, work and relationships. That they have side effects, like all other medicines, makes the monitoring essential. I've seen them work with quite a few acquaintances and friends.

Edited 1 hour ago1 hr by fredwiggy

16 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

The wrong medicine can make things worse for patients. The right ones have saved thousands of lives. Constant monitoring, which some doctors fail to do, is a major problem. Reducing depression symptoms, which is their intent, can make a person easier to cope with daily life, work and relationships. That they have side effects, like all other medicines, makes the monitoring essential. I've seen them work with quite a few acquaintances and friends.

This is NOT the point.

The POINT is habituation, over time, which is inevitable.

Also, another point, and an important point, is that the benefit from these drugs is often measured in only a few percent...ie... 2 to 5 percent better than placebo.

But, after years, this benefit turns NEGATIVE.

And, in the long-term, the result is NET HARM.

Most drug trials of the psychotropic kind, last only months, and not years.

So then, the drug companies have ZERO Evidence that there is any benefit, long-term.

The important question is benefit vs harm, over the long-term.

Edited 39 minutes ago39 min by GammaGlobulin

22 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

I've seen them work with quite a few acquaintances and friends.

Your observations are MEANINGLESS.

In order to show efficacy, one MUST have a controlled study.

I presume you know the meaning of a properly controlled study.

Or, do you not?

1 minute ago, GammaGlobulin said:

This is NOT the point.

The POINT is habituation, over time, which is inevitable.

Also, another point, and an important point, is that the benefit from these drugs is often measured in only a few percent...ie... 2 to 5 percent better than placebo.

But, after years, this benefit turns NEGATIVE.

And, in the long-term, the result is NET HARM.

Most drug trials of the psychotropic kind, last only months, and not years.

So then, the drug companies have ZERO Evidence that there is any benefit, long-term.

The important question is benefit vs harm, over the long-term.

Actually it's over 60% for the medicines vs' 30% with a placebo. There are a few types of depression and that makes the point about which ones are on placebos, as seasonal and environmental depression will improve anyway in time or if the patient is taken out of the environments. The point is they need to be constantly monitored, adjusted and changed if needed.

I know these people for decades who are still totally functional using meds whereas before they were wrecks. They've had good doctors who did monitor them over time. The benefits are obvious. They're still alive, along with thousands upon thousands of others who have been on the correct ones with a good doctor.

6 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

Your observations are MEANINGLESS.

In order to show efficacy, one MUST have a controlled study.

I presume you know the meaning of a properly controlled study.

Or, do you not?

Yes, I'm the one who studied depression for decades, to help family and friends who have it. Not one who gets interested in the disease and decides to google a few links. Decades, not a few links. My observations are as meaningful as any study as they include over 20 friends, family and others who have it, and still do. This also includes many books, podcasts on the disease. All are doing well, compared to a percentage. You like AI.........Yes, depression drugs can continue to work for many years for some people, but they can also stop working or cause new issues over time. Many individuals take them long-term to prevent depression from coming back, while others experience a loss of effectiveness.

How Long-Term Use Works

• Prevention: For people with a high risk of relapse, staying on medication for years helps keep symptoms away.

• Tolerance: Some people experience "antidepressant tolerance" (or tachyphylaxis), meaning the drug slowly stops having the same positive effect.

• Changes Over Time: Life changes, aging, or worsening stress can mean a dose needs to be adjusted or a new treatment plan is required.

Risks and Challenges of Many Years of Use

• Side Effects: Long-term use can bring ongoing issues like sexual problems, weight gain, or emotional numbness.

• Poop-Out Effect: A drug that worked well at first may seem to fade or cause fatigue and brain fog after chronic use.

• Withdrawal: Stopping a medication after years can cause strong withdrawal symptoms that feel similar to a return of depression.

  Which is what I've been saying. Monitoring, changing and adjusting. They have side effects, like I also said, but being alive is worth them.

Edited 22 minutes ago22 min by fredwiggy

2 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Yes, I'm the one who studied depression for decades, to help family and friends who have it. Not one who gets interested in the disease and decides to google a few links. Decades, not a few links. My observations are as meaningful as any study as they include over 20 friends, family and others who have it, and still do. This also includes many books, podcasts on the disease. All are doing well, compared to a percentage.

In order to test for efficacy of a psychotropic drug, or a psychiatric drug, one must collect data which is, primarily, subjective.

In addition, what "percentage" are you comparing to?

Your "results" from your family study are completely meaningless.

In order to show efficacy, you MUST do a properly controlled trial....

Have you???

NO, you have not.

Period....!!!!

1 minute ago, GammaGlobulin said:

In order to test for efficacy of a psychotropic drug, or a psychiatric drug, one must collect data which is, primarily, subjective.

In addition, what "percentage" are you comparing to?

Your "results" from your family study are completely meaningless.

In order to show efficacy, you MUST do a properly controlled trial....

Have you???

NO, you have not.

Period....!!!!

Read what I said.

Just now, fredwiggy said:

Read what I said.

I read it.

Thank you.

For severe depression, the most effective way to deal with it is often short term medication and major lifestyle changes to prevent future depression.

Later research suggests SSRIs have little or no long term effect once people stop taking them. Many end up back where they started, or even worse. Medication can help people through the worst period, but it does not necessarily solve the underlying problem.

What we do know is that activity, diet, sleep, structure, and constant work with thoughts and thought processes help many people. It does not mean you are cured, but over time you can change how your brain works through neuroplasticity.

The problem is that this takes work, every single day. Many people with depression simply do not have the energy or will to do it.

It is like diet. Most people know what they should and should not eat, yet many never change, even when they know they would be healthier if they did.

27 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Actually it's over 60% for the medicines vs' 30% with a placebo. There are a few types of depression and that makes the point about which ones are on placebos, as seasonal and environmental depression will improve anyway in time or if the patient is taken out of the environments. The point is they need to be constantly monitored, adjusted and changed if needed.

I know these people for decades who are still totally functional using meds whereas before they were wrecks. They've had good doctors who did monitor them over time. The benefits are obvious. They're still alive, along with thousands upon thousands of others who have been on the correct ones with a good doctor.

One could make the exact same argument for suggesting the use of Chinese medicine, and millions of people do.

Next, one supposes, you might want to extol the use of acupuncture?

But, before you do this: Please brush up on how to design a properly controlled trial...IF....you might wish to prove your point.