Introduction

[Sheila]

annie -- It sounds like you have been through a lot, and learned a lot, and have good reason to distrust the medical establishment, and question "expertise" and authority.

I’m curious what differences you have observed among the SSRIs in terms of their withdrawal challenges. That's very interesting to me.

That’s great you have insight about your parents misleading you about yourself. I’m sorry that happened. As you heal, you will turn that hardship into a strength, and be very clear about what you know, and maybe help others to trust themselves more.

[Chris]

I was rereading my earlier post about my knee pain. That gave me a good contrast to see how much better my knee is now. So I know this knee pain is 82% w/d related, but can you imagine trying to explain that to a reg. doctor? (there are no serotonin receptors in the knee!!)
I'm feeling much freer from the compulsion to get the doubters to believe. It's more important at the moment to protect myself from being belittled, discounted and lectured as it is to inform the world of their errors.

When I did my taper from 100 to 50 mg quite a few years ago (don't remember exactly how long ago) there wasn't nearly as much info (esp. online) about w/d as there is now. Even the book info there was suggested faster w//d than was advisable for me. That taper was a nightmare and I just quit at 50 mg. with real bad memories of w/d. Now that I'm trying it again, very slowly, I am cautiously optimistic that the slow taper will avoid the very worst of the previous w/d symptoms.so far that holds true.

I think that we humans need to generalize, which is in our nature, except that it often leads to overgeneralization--we look for absolutes, the 100%, but very little is 100%--there are almost always exceptions to most generalizations. The saying "the exception proves the rule" always struck me as illogical. because actually, the exception proves that absolute rules are wrong.

I believe more and more in the individual experience. There's nothing merely anecdotal or biased about the truth of individual experience. The problem only arises when we overgeneralize from the personal experience to everyone. As long as I don't generalize to everyone from my experience, I can rely on the validity of experience.

Of all things, the brave new world of AD w/d teaches me that we cannot expect our own experience to fit a predefined mold. Just because someone takes x number of years to recover doesn't mean my experience will be the same. In the scientific age we are conditioned to look for this kind of certainty, uniformity and predictability. medicine and science that looks for that kind of absolute predictability is a flawed method because in order for the generalizations to be operational, the exceptions must be minimized ( ignored). I for one will not have my exceptional experience ignored.

[Luc]

because in order for the generalizations to be operational, the exceptions must be minimized ( ignored). I for one will not have my exceptional experience ignored.

Yes, Annie. That's exactly what it is.

The system works as a perfect filter of reality;

There are millions of those suffering from side-effects, spellbinding, adverse reactions, and WD, BUT;

- adverse reactions are not reported
- side-effects are blamed on other things
- protracted WD as such "doesn't even exist" - it's usually just the "original condition" that causes;


Abdominal pain
Agitation
Akathisia
Anorexia
Anorgasmia
Anxiety
Arrhythmia
Bleeding disorders
Blurred vision
Cardiovascular collapse
Chest pains
Cognitive impairment
Coma
Confusion
Decreased salivation
Delirium
Diabetes
Dementia
Diaphoresis
Diarrhea
Disturbing dreams
Dizziness
Drowsiness
Dystonia
Ejaculatory disturbances
Erectile dysfunction
Fatigue
Headache
Hypertension
Hyperthermia
Hyponatremia
Insomnia
Liver damage
Loss of libido
Loss of appetite
Memory impairment
Muscle rigidity
Muscle twitching
Muscle pain
Mydriasis
Muscle twitching
Nausea
Neutropenia
Orthostatic hypotension
Parkinsonism
Personality change
Prolactin elevation
Protracted withdrawal syndrome
Psychosis
Pyridoxine deficiency
Restlessness
Sedation
Serotonin syndrome
Shivering
Stiff neck
Tachycardia
Tardive diskinesia
Tremor
Unconsciousness
Urinary hesitancy and retention
Vomiting
Weight gain

...in a person who had it prescribed for IBS, mild depression, or allergy...


Also, many people on drugs are spellbound - imprisoned in not only psychological BUT chemical denial (Dr. Peter Breggin explains it so well) http://breggin.com/index.php?option=...sk=view&id=243

So many peple get institutionalized, often till the end of their lives. Those that have managed to escape such fate are bedridden, or unable to leave their homes at best. We are not even able to see them.

Then, doctors are in denial themselves, and suffer from "obedience to authority" syndrome of its own - their own form of spell-binding, believing what their text-books (written by Big Pharma to a large extent), leaflets, research, studies, trials, and seminars* tell them, trusting Academia, which, in turn, is sponsored by Big Pharma bucks - studies/research is costly. *Some* doctors are so opportunistic they couldn't care less, ready to lie through their teeth to just get promoted, get more financial "incentives". And those who are seeing through it, and are honest enough to say "no", are ostracized and jettisoned by the system. Like Mark Foster, for instance; http://www.madinamerica.com/2011/05/...-his-employer/

Mainstream media run drugs commercials 24/7, and should they try to criticize any of their advertisers, they would go "poof!" overnight.

So, at the end of the day, instead of "s/he is so ill because s/he has taken drugs for 20 years now", it is "s/he has taken drugs for 20 years now because s/he is so ill".



*so often in very hot and exotic countries

It may, at first glance, look like gloom and doom what I just wrote about, but, once we have learnt of what is really going on, it can be changed.

[Sheila]

annie – you’re developing a very mature epistemological stance, one that rigorously looks at evidence as it appears, with as open a mind as possible.

And, as you say, in addition to all the problems with Western medicine that Luc mentioned, it strongly emphasizes norms, whereas I think non-Western and holistic systems are more likely to look at each individual case as unique.

Also, you are really contributing a very valuable, hard-to-achieve perspective to this board right now by emphasizing that, although we have similar issues and can learn from each other, each of us in w/d is on an utterly unique path, driven by our own spiritual, psychological, and physical histories and destinies. It is so hard, when we are suffering and scared, not to compare ourselves to others in an attempt to find some relief. We all do it. But your stance is the wisest one.

[Chris]

As with many drugs in the recent past, thousands of reports to the FDA of major problems with generic Wellbutrin were ignored until lawsuits were filed and won.[i ] Only then was the drug banned by the FDA. The avalanche of reports were ignored because they were “anecdotal,” lacking the official evidence provided by drug company- sponsored “research.” It is argued that individual reports of adverse effects -- even thousands of reports-- lack the definitive objectivity of official drug studies even though these studies are often funded by the drug companies. ‘Market forces’ is the new objectivity.[ii]

The opposition of ‘research studies’ with ‘anecdotal evidence’ is a false dichotomy which assumes the objective purity and disinterested science of pharmaceutical drug trials.
The term ‘anecdotal’ was chosen over such terms as “first-hand eye witness accounts” in order to emphasize the superiority of powerful corporate interests over the individual’s.

The term ‘anecdotal evidence’ is an oxymoron. An anecdote is by definition not evidence. In common parlance, an anecdote refers to a story that lacks verification, like a myth or a legend, often rambling, easily dismissed as apocryphal, as in this example from Webster’s: “Senility, as characterized by the telling of rambling anecdotes;” and in this example of dialogue:
Gary: “I enjoy telling interesting anecdotes, such as “My name is Gary and I’m from Gary, Indiana.”
Ansari Aziz: “ Gary, a fact is not an anecdote. Here’s an anecdote: ‘Today I met the most boring person in the world. His name is Gary.’

‘Anecdotal evidence’ is a euphemism for “we can ignore you” unless you can afford high priced lawyers and experts to take on the most powerful corporations and regulatory agencies in the world. To have any chance of success, your anecdote should involve death or major birth defects. [iii]


i http://www.peoplespharmacy.com/2012/...sant-recalled/


ii http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/us...anted=all&_r=0
http://www.pharmalot.com/2012/07/mer...xx-harm-study/

http://www.naturalnews.com/034824_FD...leblowers.html
http://www.pharmalot.com/2012/07/fda...gency-lawyers/
http://ecohearth.com/eco-op-ed/1772-...onspiracy.html
http://www.regaffairs.net/news/fda-c...y-capture.html
http://dream-warrior.bestforumonline...tical-industry

http://www.cspinet.org/new/200606271.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewh...er-speaks-out/
http://ecohearth.com/eco-op-ed/1772-...onspiracy.html


iii http://www.beasleyfirm.com/product-l...birth-defects/

http://www.orangecountylaw.com/lawye...y-1885557.html

http://commonhealth.wbur.org/2012/06...ants-pregnancy

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encycloped...her-29525.html

[Luc]

The opposition of ‘research studies’ with ‘anecdotal evidence’ is a false dichotomy which assumes the objective purity and disinterested science of pharmaceutical drug trials. The term ‘anecdotal’ was chosen over such terms as “first-hand eye witness accounts” in order to emphasize the superiority of powerful corporate interests over the individual’s.

The term ‘anecdotal evidence’ is an oxymoron. An anecdote is by definition not evidence. In common parlance, an anecdote refers to a story that lacks verification, like a myth or a legend, often rambling, easily dismissed as apocryphal, as in this example from Webster’s: “Senility, as characterized by the telling of rambling anecdotes;” and in this example of dialogue:
Gary: “I enjoy telling interesting anecdotes, such as “My name is Gary and I’m from Gary, Indiana.”
Ansari Aziz: “ Gary, a fact is not an anecdote. Here’s an anecdote: ‘Today I met the most boring person in the world. His name is Gary.’

‘Anecdotal evidence’ is a euphemism for “we can ignore you” unless you can afford high priced lawyers and experts to take on the most powerful corporations and regulatory agencies in the world. To have any chance of success, your anecdote should involve death or major birth defects. [iii]

That is a great point. The bad side of NLP at its best. When you hear "anecdotal", your mind automatically discredits whatever there is to follow. But this "anecdotal" evidence is, in fact, closer to the truth than anything else, having gone through fewer systemic filters than the "research" they are flaunting. That is why, when you want to find as objective data as possible (about a drug for instance), the best way is to check what people in general say about it (in as many sources as possible). It's good to start with the Internet forums. With one caveat - the system knows the power of the Web, so it will be using paid-off posters to either discredit the real positive data on one drug, or prop up the fraudulent one on the other. As long as the Internet remains relatively free, it is definitely possible to sort out the truth.

[Sheila]

Ha ha! Funny dialogue. Wow, you've done a lot of research here, annie -- wanna write an article?

Exactamundo, Luc -- I always tell people -- go to the consumer-driven sites for info about meds, not the institutional ones.

[Chris]

In "Masked and Anonymous" the sleazy huckster character says: "You know I'm not some vicious person in a position of wealth and power."
Bob Dylan replies: " You're like a chemist who invents a drug and doesn't care about the side effects." (1:09)

[Chris]

This board is so important because it provides the through line--the thread that connects the stories. That's another reason the vested interests use the label anecdotal to describe our experiences--to emphasize the disconnection between the stories -- to suggest a randomness, without clear cause and effect.
"Anecdotes" lack a through line--a connecting theme that binds them together to create a coherent picture. Like the way dreams are anecdotal--shifting from scene to scenario, without transition or apparent connection. In my dream, one moment I was in the jungle with tigers, then I was in a gymnasium, then quick cut to driving on the freeway--each tableau a little discrete anecdote.
By terming our AD experience anecdotal the goal is to keep our stories disconnected, each in its own separate box. divide and conquer.
This board allows the dots to be connected --for there to be a unifying thread. what we have in common --we all turned onto the AD freeway and we're all looking for the exit while trying not to crash.

[Chris]

I’m curious what differences you have observed among the SSRIs in terms of their withdrawal challenges. That's very interesting to me.

There are differences--thus the musical chairs of docs switching patients to different ADs. Back in the bad old days of musical chairs, prozac and Wellbutrin were way too stimulating for me. I see Zoloft as sedating like a sedative. But also note its relation to dopamine recep. But, My views of ADs seem to be changing as I learn from this site and my own w/d. Probably, in terms of withdrawhell, the ADs are more alike than not. They all reconfigure the brain. It is just amazing to me that scientists who know how complex and sensitive the brain is for all body functions, think that you could radically alter neurotransmitters and not cause severe side effects. (sorry can't resist the editorial)

This is a link to a chart of some differences btwn ADs. The original chart is clearer than below which lost formatting.


http://www.emedexpert.com/compare/ssris.shtml

Secondary binding properties of SSRIs:

Citalopram (Celexa) most selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor
Escitalopram (Lexapro) most selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor
Fluoxetine (Prozac) least selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor
norepinephrine reuptake 18
dopamine reuptake 18
serotonin-2C receptors 21
cytochrome P450 2D6
cytochrome P450 3A4
Paroxetine (Paxil) muscarinic cholinergic receptors (most potent blocker of muscarinic receptors among the SSRIs)
histamine H1 receptors
nitric oxide synthase
cytochrome P450 2D6
Sertraline (Zoloft) dopamine reuptake (more potent dopamine uptake inhibitor than other SSRIs) 22
norepinephrine reuptake
sigma receptors