Author Topic: FDA warning on SSRIs  (Read 43391 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Paul

  • Posts: 438
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #210 on: June 15, 2005, 02:06:00 PM »
Do you respect the mother's choice to choose
whay type of treatment?

You say the meds did not good, glossing over
the statements that when he was on meds he
was fine.

When he died he was not on meds.

I believe that is a fact, yes or no?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
or those who don\'t understand my position, on all subjects:

* Understand the law and your rights.

* Make sure you have the freedom of choice.

* Seek and receive unbiased information and
know the source of information.

Offline Paul

  • Posts: 438
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #211 on: June 15, 2005, 02:11:00 PM »
Sadistic Killers

I assume you're talking about the deceased. If you mean the sadistic killers, that would be a different story.

---

Wow, really?
Who was charged, and what where the charges?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
or those who don\'t understand my position, on all subjects:

* Understand the law and your rights.

* Make sure you have the freedom of choice.

* Seek and receive unbiased information and
know the source of information.

Offline Paul

  • Posts: 438
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #212 on: June 15, 2005, 02:13:00 PM »
The short answer:

If I had the limited information the mother (and the majority of people) had, I may have done the same.

Given the information I am aware of, way back when he was 6 years old I would have:



1)Ruled out any neurological, visual, or medical problems

2)Altered his diet and added supplements. Check for food allergies.

3)Find the source of the ?learning difficulty?. Determine if he might do better in private school. Does he have ?attention deficit? or ?selective attention??

---

I know the information is limited, but
perhaps all these items where carried out?

Could you find out?

Do you know what percentage of the time mental
illness is solved by these items that you mentioned? It would be great to know, wouldn't it?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
or those who don\'t understand my position, on all subjects:

* Understand the law and your rights.

* Make sure you have the freedom of choice.

* Seek and receive unbiased information and
know the source of information.

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #213 on: June 15, 2005, 02:31:00 PM »
Paul, I realize you have a problem with detail... so let me remind you that you asked what "I" would do.

Young said after her son's arrest she phoned the Edmonton Young Offenders Centre to inquire about his pills, but was told that OUTSIDE medication
wasn't allowed.

Toxicology tests performed after the boy's death were INCONCLUSIVE.  :question: Was he given other drugs? Was he having withdrawal symptoms?

When he didn't take his medication, she said he could quickly "flip-out," swear, and throw things.

Royal said a report from the young offenders centre said Kyle Young exhibited a LONG HISTORY of behavioural problems, including an explosive
temper, trouble learning, impulsive tendencies and an aggressive, angry manner.

Sounds to me like the kid didn't have peace before or after the drugs.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline Paul

  • Posts: 438
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #214 on: June 15, 2005, 04:12:00 PM »
"Sounds to me like the kid didn't have peace before or after the drugs."
[/quote]

We agree on this one.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
or those who don\'t understand my position, on all subjects:

* Understand the law and your rights.

* Make sure you have the freedom of choice.

* Seek and receive unbiased information and
know the source of information.

Offline Paul

  • Posts: 438
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #215 on: June 15, 2005, 04:27:00 PM »
Deborah,

"... so let me remind you that you asked what "I" would do."

You are correct, sorry if my response was negative.
I didn't make myself clear.

I do agree with what you would have done. I believe
each item you mentioned should be checked out. Hopefully one of them would help the person.

I should have said it that way, and added that I
wonder how often the protocol that you suggested
finds a solution. Not a negative, but more of just
hoping it is significant.

We agree again, thanks.

Paul
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
or those who don\'t understand my position, on all subjects:

* Understand the law and your rights.

* Make sure you have the freedom of choice.

* Seek and receive unbiased information and
know the source of information.

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #216 on: June 16, 2005, 12:01:00 AM »
Safe Harbor's final response....

Here is a copy of the e-mail Paul sent me:

http://sandiego.networkofcare.org/mh/home/prop63.cfm
http://www.cimh.org/mhsa.cfm
Paul Cumming
(phone numbers omitted for security)

I personally know there IS forced drugging. My father was drugged AGAINST MY FAMILY'S WISHES almost continually in the last years of his life. I had power of attorney and the doctors drugged my father anyway, against my direct orders. One psychiatrist even went so far as to go to court to get permission, directly against and intentionally against my wishes and my family's wishes. The court (in Ventura County) also decided to take conservatorship for a couple of years, despite the fact that my father had family who cared for him, and were taking care of him. My father had Alzheimer's. He could not sign his consent. And no consent form was EVER given to me to sign. The system is very broken and needs extreme reform.

Paul is stuck on this evidence based thing. "Evidence based medicine" simply means using research studies as a guide to clinical decisions and practice. As I mentioned, that has nothing to do with Safe Harbor's decision to not
pursue government funding. If Paul wants to talk to me about how it can benefit Safe Harbor, I would be happy to listen. My e-mail is
[email protected]. He may also contact Dan Stradford at 626-791-7868 to discuss it.

Just for the record, most, if not all, alternatives we promote are indeed evidence-based medicine. We are not "turned off" by evidence base medicine.

In fact, we welcome it in any alternatives we present at our conferences. Many of the alternatives are just plain standard medical practice, which is many times ignored in favor of giving drugs without actually looking and
finding the real illness and treating the real illness appropriately.

Here is some additional data for your information from an attendee at our conference who also works in the mental health system:

"* There are over several hundred identifiable actual medical conditions which all manifest as psychiatric conditions in both children and adults.
* There are at least 48 conditions that look like ADD alone.
* There are eleven categories of medical illness involving dozens of individual diseases and conditions which manifest as anxiety. * There
are nine categories of life threatening medical illnesses that present as psychiatric emergency conditions.
* There are eight categories medical problems involving scores of conditions which mimic psychosis.

"These conditions are accessible by medical testing, and treatable with medical and support interventions.  According to the research presented, persons who present with psychiatric symptoms and conditions rarely get screened or tested further for any of these conditions before being started into a course of psychiatric medication treatment.  California reported a study showing that of all of the persons who present for public mental health treatment in a year, none were screened for other medical conditions.  This is leading to a change of their state laws for mental health treatment, professional practice act, and reimbursement.

"The voices of experience speaking as one.  The physicians and researchers speaking at this conference and the previous three annual
conferences I've attended, warned that when these conditions are observed solely through the lens of mental health assessment, 'mental health screening', or psychiatric treatment alone, the results can be disastrous, resulting not only in the potential for life long suffering but for death.  The voices of psychiatric ex-patients and survivors also warn against mandatory mental health screening.  This is one voice being heard from these two groups.

"If you are alive, you are at risk. Affecting anyone, the most vulnerable include those with limited resources of access to information and treatment options. How many of the following things which present as psychiatric disturbances might be present in the most vulnerable of our population without access to information and cause-specific screening:
*cumulative excitotoxin poisioning from artificial sweeteners and MSG type food additives - dozens of schools and hospitals are
eliminating access to these products
*environmental toxic disorders due to heavy metal and other exposures
*metabolic deficiencies related due to a prolonged diet of processed food or genetic conditions (requiring life long treatment.)
*chronic intra-cellular dehydration due to aversion of water as the fluid of choice for health in favor of the 'sexy' but dehydrating liquids taken instead (caffeine, soda, alcohol, etc)

"Do we recognize any of the above as risk factors in the persons we serve? or for ourselves for that matter?  Even with mental health screening, do we have what it takes to go further to identify, diagnose, and treat those conditions which are not mental illnesses but pretend they are before starting a person on a perilous  course?  It will take more than screening.  It will take a change of public, economic, political, and personal will."

Apparently, Paul, you have not been paying attention to the FDA requiring black box warnings on SSRI's. Or to the many studies showing that SSRI's are often no more effective than placebo and much more dangerous. They can cause violent behavior, suicidal ideation, suicide, murder, along with diabetes, liver and kidney damage, brain damage, etc. Anti-psychotics and older
psychiatric drugs are also fraught with side effects.

Also, patients and clients are not routinely given data about alternatives along with data about drugs, so it can hardly be fully informed consent. Many people seek out Safe Harbor to learn about the alternatives because they have not been able to get the data from their practitioners.

I am not interested in any further anti-religious or antagonistic rhetoric. As you know, it is nonproductive. It also indicates to me that the person degrading others has something to hide. Care to come clean, Paul?

It appears to me that you, Paul, are not paying attention to what is really going on in the world of mental health. Things are starting to change, but major changes are needed to move the system away from constant drugging and towards actually finding and treating the real illnesses people often have or helping them handle real problems. We are doing this. We have numerous success stories evidencing our help to individuals. We would welcome your help in our mission, if you sincerely want to help.

Wendy Bolt
SAFE HARBOR
787 W. Woodbury Rd., #2
Altadena, CA  91001


[ This Message was edited by: Deborah on 2005-06-15 21:11 ]
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #217 on: June 16, 2005, 12:09:00 AM »
FYI, Paul wasn't content wasting people time and attention in one forum, so he duplicated some of this discussion in another forum.
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... =22#110297
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline Paul

  • Posts: 438
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #218 on: June 16, 2005, 11:50:00 AM »
I created a forum with the subject
Safe Harbor, so that readers would
be able to find it.

No conspiricy here Deborah.

Is there a litmus tests to determine
which posts and which subjects are
a waste of time?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
or those who don\'t understand my position, on all subjects:

* Understand the law and your rights.

* Make sure you have the freedom of choice.

* Seek and receive unbiased information and
know the source of information.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #219 on: June 16, 2005, 01:36:00 PM »
So a doctor felt your decisions about your father were so adverse to his health that he actually took it to court and the judge agreed with him and gave the order?

That doesn't necessarily mean the system is broken, that just means a judgment went against you, personally.

If Paul had decided a given medication was a bad idea for his loved one and decided to withhold it, and the doctor ordered it anyway, I'd be more inclined to suspect the system was broken.

I know this has to be heavily emotionally laden for you.

But doctors go to court to order the treatment of the children of Christian Scientists all the time, when a transfusion would save the child's life and the parents won't allow it, or in other cases where a *reasonable person* would allow treatment.

The judge in the case decided you were not a reasonable person.

Maybe the system isn't broken.  Maybe the judge was just right.

We talked before, in another thread, about what an extreme minority opinion your opinions on psychoactive medications are.

And you can refuse those medications for yourself, no matter how sick you get.

But when someone with extreme minority medical opinions, and little to no medical training, tries to refuse them for someone else, I'm glad that our system allows a judge to decide whether that person is acting against a patient's interests or not, and appoint a different guardian if the judge thinks the present one *is* acting against the patient's best interests.

I don't know if you would have won if you had had the money and appealed the decision all the way up to the Supreme Court, or until some appeals court declined to hear the case.  I don't know if you *did* pursue all appeals.

I do know that just the fact that you lost your bid to make an extreme minority decisions for someone else, someone not competent to decide for himself, does not necessarily mean the system is broken.

It could just mean you are the one who's wrong.

What I think is scary is that you appear in capable of seriously considering that you might be wrong.

I'm really sorry for your pain and your loss, but if anything your story just shows how far outside the mainstream your own opinions are, and how much objective, disinterested, reasonable people---like the judge---disagree with you.

Timoclea
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #220 on: June 16, 2005, 01:37:00 PM »
er...incapable

T.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Paul

  • Posts: 438
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #221 on: June 20, 2005, 01:53:00 PM »
Quote
On 2005-06-15 21:01:00, Deborah wrote:

"Safe Harbor's final response....





I am not interested in any further anti-religious or antagonistic rhetoric. As you know, it is nonproductive. It also indicates to me that the person degrading others has something to hide. Care to come clean, Paul?



Wendy Bolt

SAFE HARBOR


I was just re-reading some of this thread and noticed Wendy's challenge.

Ok, I am on the San Diego County Mental Health Board, I have Bipolar Disord, I am on meds, I have
had the most success with ECT than anything else, one time, 5 treatments and then I was able to cut down my meds dramatically. For about 15 years I sought out alternative treatments to no avail. I did meet alot of cash only practicioners who promised alot, demonized western medicine and after I learned the hard way had no success stories that where reproducable ...

OK, now for Safe Harbor to be more legitimate I would like to see there Scientology links posted on the flash page, that way when people find out they don't feel so deceived and discredit everything Safe Harbor does, even the good stuff.
That is the danger of deception, credibility.

Wendy Bolt:
http://scientologist.myhomepage.org/wen ... uccess.htm

Dan Stradford, President, Owner

http://www.factnet.org/discus/messages/ ... 1107978563

"Safe Harbor --- not so safe..."
http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/safe-harbo ... tology.htm

illa-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
or those who don\'t understand my position, on all subjects:

* Understand the law and your rights.

* Make sure you have the freedom of choice.

* Seek and receive unbiased information and
know the source of information.

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #222 on: June 25, 2005, 01:05:00 AM »
http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_repo ... R_ID=30911

AMA Declines To Support Ban on DTC Prescription Drug Ads, Pending Study


Ablechild has contacted the American Medical Association to find out their position on the following questions. We encourage all to contact
Erin Woods at the American Medical Association 312-464-5926.

What is the AMA's position on forced drugging of children onto antidepressants within State Care?

What is the AMA's position on setting up a database at the Medical Examiner's office to screen suicide victims at the time of death for
antidepressant use?

What is the AMA's position on a checklist diagnosis at time of death to determine, Did this victim of suicide have access to mental health
services if so what kind?

What is the AMA's position on having all suicide deaths been given a toxicity screening and history of the start or withdrawal from antidepressants prior to death?

What is the AMA's position on informed consent relating to the Blackbox warning issued by the FDA?

What is the AMA's position on Insurance Coverage for persons know to have been taking antidepressant prior to suicide death?

What is the AMA's position on Legal Rights of the families of those who have died via suicide and confirmed to have been started on, withdrawn
from, or were using antidepressants prior to suicide death?

The AMA should be obligated to give answers to these basic questions.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline Paul

  • Posts: 438
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #223 on: June 25, 2005, 11:45:00 PM »
Quote

On 2005-06-24 22:05:00, Deborah wrote:

"http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=30911



AMA Declines To Support Ban on DTC Prescription Drug Ads, Pending Study
Quote


OK, I went to the link. I think everyone should read the whole article. This is an example of where just posting a link, then making a comment can create innacuracies.

First, I don't think Deborah read the article because there is another issue in there that she
would have really been upset about.

Second, it turns out that the delay in the final vote on the ban recommendation by the AMA is that
their sub-committee had a legal question of a first ammendment nature.

I say, let them figure it out, then check out their rationale. Or hey, at least tell the readers in your post Deborah, what the stated reason was!

Regarding your referral to the article and posting
a list of questions send by ablechild.org. I couldn't find those questions on their website, nor what was the official reason for doing so.

Could you post your source for those questions?

Thank you!

Paul
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
or those who don\'t understand my position, on all subjects:

* Understand the law and your rights.

* Make sure you have the freedom of choice.

* Seek and receive unbiased information and
know the source of information.

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
FDA warning on SSRIs
« Reply #224 on: June 26, 2005, 02:41:00 PM »
If you're interested in receiving information from Ablechild I guess you should sign up to receive their press releases/newsletters.

Nothing 'inaccurate' about:
AMA Declines To Support Ban on DTC Prescription Drug Ads, Pending Study

'Stated reason'... Pending Study
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700