FDA warning on SSRIs

[001010]

On 2005-06-28 13:02:00, Antigen wrote:

"The legislation just passed without the Paul amendment, which would have made parental consent a requirement. So, as I understand it, the new policy allows the public school system to screen all students for mental illness (by what definition?) w/o even asking their parents' permission.



It's a done deal now. If you don't want your kid to be screened by some anonymous stranger presenting themselves as psyche pros, you have to go out of your way to explicitly deny permission. And, knowing the ps system as I do, I'd say it's probably wise to fill your kids in on what mental health screening is and make sure they understand you don't want them to participate and that, despite what anyone might say or imply, you won't be mad at them if they refuse.

Truth does not have to be accepted on faith. Scientists do not hold hands every Sunday, singing, "Yes gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! Amen.
--Dan Barker, former evangelist and author

"

Thanks for the heads up. I'll be sure all of her teachers (and she) knows next year and beyond. She has a shrink that she's seen before anyway. She's on record in his office and his office only. I'm still baffled that this is being carried out this way. I'm a believer in psychiatry, but when you take away free will, it's just force. A big no thank you to big brother on that one. New Freedom, sheesh did they get this crap right out of 1984? Welcome to the New America, where a new kind of freedom rings -- the ring of chains jangling.  :scared:

Thanks again to both of you guys.  :wave:

All are lunatics, but he who can analyze his delusion is called a philosopher.
--Ambrose Bierce

_________________
EST (Lifespring) '83
Salesmanship Club '84-'86
Straight, Inc. '86-'88

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. ~ Edmund Burke

[Nihilanthic]

*sigh* amazing how this shit passes without a peep on TV, which is far too busy keeping everyone quiet with the hand-picked 'issues' that sate the average consumer whore between trips to go shopping at walmart or to stuff their faces, or both if they buy more cookiedough icecream (in a two gallon tub!)

Im going to go out of my way to protect the one sister I have left from this crap (who is 9), but my parents are already the sort to be wary of it. I'll just make sure its PRO-active, not after the fact.

I also plan to go to my old highschool and raise hell... it was a charter school for kids who didnt go too well with the existing school paradigm, we had a lot less bullshit testing, etc. But, state mandates meant we had EOGs (which I just aced instead of bothering to do any school work) until I got totally fed up and got my GED and skipped straight to college due to a mix of personal  crap and the resultant lack of tolerance for bullshit.

Oh well, with what I know now they would either be really glad or really NOT glad to see me  :grin:

The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. ... All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.
--Hermann Goering, Luftwaffe commander, sentenced to death at Nuremberg

[Anonymous]

Hurray passive-consumerism. Don't question anything and consume, consume, consume!
This kind of thing is working out *too* well for the companies, ESPECIALLY the drug companies. Even with the thousands of lawsuits being filed against them for every drug under the sun, nobody hesitates to shove a 10 year old kid on Prozac.
There is something incredibly messed up about that. Seriously. :/

[001010]

I think the way they probably look at it is that they've been doing it for years privately anyway, only now, the government can benefit by partnering with the drug companies instead of losing money on welfare. They (W & co) probably feel the nation?s poor and needy owe them for all the years the welfare system was actually helping -- but noooo, they didn't have enough control then, and weren't benefiting themselves. Our government wants you to believe marijuana is evil, but that forcing psyche meds on children is okay?

Do I really want to have another baby?  :razz:

Then I went here:

http://www.nami.org/template.cfm?sectio ... Commission

and here:

http://www.mentalhealthcommission.gov/

and here:

http://www.mentalhealthcommission.gov/mission.html

oh, and here too:

http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/update09.07.04.htm

So, yeah...

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins; all of them imaginary.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0679728953/circlofmiamithem' target='_new'> H.L. Mencken, 1923

_________________
EST (Lifespring) '83
Salesmanship Club '84-'86
Straight, Inc. '86-'88

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. ~ Edmund Burke

[Paul]

On 2005-06-29 06:54:00, 001010 wrote:

"I think the way they probably look at it is that they've been doing it for years privately anyway, only now, the government can benefit by partnering with the drug companies instead of losing money on welfare. They (W & co) probably feel the nation?s poor and needy owe them for all the years the welfare system was actually helping -- but noooo, they didn't have enough control then, and weren't benefiting themselves. Our government wants you to believe marijuana is evil, but that forcing psyche meds on children is okay?



Do I really want to have another baby?  :razz:



Then I went here:



http://www.nami.org/template.cfm?sectio ... Commission



and here:



http://www.mentalhealthcommission.gov/



and here:



http://www.mentalhealthcommission.gov/mission.html



oh, and here too:



http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/update09.07.04.htm



So, yeah...

I don't have time to read these links, now, but I will later.

I just want to make a couple of comments.

1) Hardly any bills are on TV beforehand. That is why advocacy groups are so important.

2) The suggestions from the New Freedom Commission as I understand it was brought to them from both the public, industry and patients, as well as any anti that wanted to testify. It didn't come down from the government.

3) I thought the Paul Ammendment was all about funding? You all are only talking about consent. That is the problem of building too much into one ammendment. Sorry, it happens all the time. If the consent issue was so important to Rep. Paul he should have signaled it out. If he didn't, he knew it would fail along with the rest of his restriction of funding ammendment. Why? He introduced the same ammendment the year before. So was he simply grandstanding to please some constituancy or was he serious?

4) Who ever has a problem with the bill better start doing something other than posting to boards and sharing the same info over and over, hence flooding, but not acting.

5) Now for the confusing part to me:

Fornits states the govt:
Our government wants you to believe marijuana is evil, but that forcing psyche meds on children is okay?

Fornits promotes:
Freedom to take all currently illegal drugs but slams people if they choose to take certain prescription medications.

To me, that is weird.

Why not freedom with no criticism?

[Anonymous]

On 2005-06-29 09:19:00, Paul wrote:

"Now for the confusing part to me:



Fornits states the govt:

Our government wants you to believe marijuana is evil, but that forcing psyche meds on children is okay?



Fornits promotes:

Freedom to take all currently illegal drugs but slams people if they choose to take certain prescription medications.



To me, that is weird."

What is weird to me, is the fact you believe Fornits speaks with one voice. Is there a fornits manifesto I haven't read somewhere? You are one strange fella, huh?

[Deborah]

I perceive it as slander, an attempt to discredit the entire site. Of course, unwarranted.
It?s my understanding that it is part of the One World Order plan and came directly from the prez in collusion with drug companies. The same political/pharmaceutical alliance that generated the TMAP project was behind the recommendations of the New Freedom Commission. Re: Paul?s bill-it was about funding and consent. And don't be confused. Many did a lot, as much as they could.

http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... rt=0#86638
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... um=9#52430
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... =110#87751
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... =110#85820

[Paul]

On 2005-06-29 10:37:00, Deborah wrote:



I perceive it as slander, an attempt to discredit the entire site.
"

Deborah, while you have insulted me time and time again, any comments that you don't agree with are a slander? Give me a break. Really?

I guess I was confused when logging on to Fornit's and the book that is in honor of Peter McWilliam's is displayed that indicated support of removing laws against illegal drugs, am I wrong?

Do I think Fornit's is one voice, no.

[001010]

I am not the voice of Fornits. Only the great and powerful OZ can hear the voice!  :tup:
 

Vain are the thousand creeds that move men's hearts, unutterably vain, worthless as wither'd weeds.
--Emily Bronte

_________________
EST (Lifespring) '83
Salesmanship Club '84-'86
Straight, Inc. '86-'88

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. ~ Edmund Burke

[Paul]

On 2005-06-29 18:27:00, 001010 wrote:

"I am not the voice of Fornits. Only the great and powerful OZ can hear the voice!  :smile:

I don't know anyone who believes in force as a front line treatment protocol.

Regarding getting slammed on Fornits, I have been called a drug addict for taking my meds, I believe it was Deborah. So the slams do happen.

Deborah has stated she has nothing to do with anyone who is mentally ill, she also states that she is not against personal choice, but she does state that she is against the industry. I don't know, to me, if someone is against the industry that is providing my medication, I connect the dots, and weigh in that she called me a drug addict, I would say that is a pretty slim line of personal choice.

Perhaps it is personal choice with harrassment and an onslaught of activity to eliminate the supply ... eliminate the supply, then what choice do I have.


Offer an alternative, promote it, and everyone lives happily after. No one needs to be trying to shut down any industry. Why would anyone want to shut down an industry, if one has nothing to do with the people who are helped by that industry?

[Paul]

On 2005-06-29 18:27:00, 001010 wrote:

I believe in options, not force.  

Woops, I meant to just comment here, I guess I went off on a tangent. Perhaps it is my Bipolar Disorder that caused that, according to one insightful poster today :smile:

Anyway, I just have thought that TeenScreen was voluntary.

Apparently it is not.

That is a bummer.

[webcrawler]

Okay, as much as I am sick of hearing about Tom Cruise I had to make a comment after reading this thread.

When he says such things as mental illness doesn't exist, I wonder if it is because he has never experienced it and therefore is unqualified to make that declaration.

People are entitled to their own opinion, but for someone to tell me that a problem or feeling does not exist for me it's quite arrogant and based on assumptions. Tom is not me. Tom is not in my body. Tom therefore does NOT know what I go through on a daily basis.

I don't have the luxury like Tom to change my enviroment with $$$ so things in my life can get somewhat better and my state of mind to a point where I'm not feeling as much depression.

I also do not find it a comfort to sit in any type of church on some uncomfortable bench or chair and have someone standing in front of me saying I will go to hell if I don't do exactly as they say.

Sorry this is getting long. I also will add that the other day on the radio I listened to an interview w/ a woman from Chicago that is the head of (leader, whatever) the COS and she admitted that the followers will not be given access to info unless they pay. It's a teir system. The more one pays the more "knowledge" they disclose.

Imagine a desperate person who is lonely, sad, suicidial, and isolated seeking support from them. Now imagine this person giving away their life savings in the quest to be enlightened and have all their pain taken away. No thanks.

[Cidsa]

First of all an SSRI is:
Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. A type of drug that is used to treat depression. SSRIs slow the process by which serotonin (a substance that nerves use to send messages to one another) is reused by nerve cells that make it. This increases the amount of serotonin available for stimulating other nerves.

I myself was forced on Paxil at around 12 or 13 and i've been addicted and riddled with symptoms since (im almost 20 now).
There is another site all about paxil and it is here: http://paxil.bizland.com/

It has a very handy guide to getting off paxil, which I'm going to have to try as soon as my memory stops being so awful.
I personally wish I had never been forced on this, I would probably feel a lot better..As it is I'm sick every day and I almost never feel happy, but I hardly ever feel sad either..just a middle ground.

Anyways, the front page of that talks about the fact that GSK hid information about suicidal tendancies and I'll vouch for it. Until that drug, suicide never really came into my mind. Then I was attempting/threatning it every week.

[Paul]

On 2005-06-30 18:44:00, Cidsa wrote:

"First of all an SSRI is:

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. A type of drug that is used to treat depression. SSRIs slow the process by which serotonin (a substance that nerves use to send messages to one another) is reused by nerve cells that make it. This increases the amount of serotonin available for stimulating other nerves.



I myself was forced on Paxil at around 12 or 13 and i've been addicted and riddled with symptoms since (im almost 20 now).

There is another site all about paxil and it is here: http://paxil.bizland.com/



It has a very handy guide to getting off paxil, which I'm going to have to try as soon as my memory stops being so awful.

I personally wish I had never been forced on this, I would probably feel a lot better..As it is I'm sick every day and I almost never feel happy, but I hardly ever feel sad either..just a middle ground.



Anyways, the front page of that talks about the fact that GSK hid information about suicidal tendancies and I'll vouch for it. Until that drug, suicide never really came into my mind. Then I was attempting/threatning it every week."

I am sorry to hear that of your negative experience with Paxil. I hope your doctors can help you resolve the health condition you mention.

I have been very fortunat. I have been on many different medications of all classifications and have never had a problem getting off of them. I have no side effects from my current combination of Effexor and Lamictal.

There are many medications and combinations available now, little or no side effects should be the goal. This is of course, if you decide that medications are right for you. Good luck.

[Deborah]

If you read the information I?ve posted you?d have some idea of who believes in ?force?.

No Paul, I didn?t say that I had ?no involvement with anyone who was ?mentally ill?. I said that I don?t work with the ?mentally ill?, nor did I care to work in 'public mental health'.

I do have family and friends who have had involvement with the industry. I have friends and family who choose to use drugs in spite of the information I have shared with them. Several family members have had negative experiences. One committed suicide while on antidepressants under the ?care? of a shrink. One is having severe neurological problems that stem from years of taking Adderall. My ex is a Zoloft junky- tried but couldn't get off. My mother's neighbor and friend committed suicide while taking Paxil- his wife received a handsome settlement. There are probably others I'm not thinking of now.

I was content to post information about the industry that people may not find otherwise, and pretty much as it pertains to young people. I made NO derogatory comments to you (or Tim) until you/she attacked me personally, rather than refuting the information I had posted.
Should I have ignored the personal attacks? Yeh, probably. But I?m not a saint. You and Tim both have used the 'bipolar' excuse for your rudeness. Having a psych dx sure hindered my nephew from learning the social skills he desperately needed- what I consider to be the crux of his 'problems'.

Advocating informed consent, honesty, and transparecy has nothing to do with eliminating your supply of drugs OR shutting down the industry. That may be the most ridiculous comment you?ve made so far. I wouldn?t waste my time on such an ill-fated agenda- they're here to stay.