FDA Alert: Watch for Suicide of Kids on AD's 10/27/03

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 00:02:00 -0500, Mark D Morin
wrote:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 03:30:23 +0000, jake wrote:


I think most readers are intelligent enough to form their own opinions
based the entire text rather than paragraphs quoted here and there.

clearly you do not think any such thing
..as your spinning would then be redundant

Clearly you

perhaps you should clean your spectacles(or get some if you dont wear
them)
if you wish to talk of clearly..

FWIMBW I posted it in another group in its entirety..
you on the contrary added to it..


and linda are the two who cut and paste info from the
alert.

I will disuss issues but not your obsession with Linda..
AFAIAA concern with violating copyright is the issue..
rather than your uglyminded interpretations..






For most readers..I supect the original Reuters headline is clear
enough..

Watch for Suicide with Depression Drugs, FDA Says
Mon October 27, 2003 02:31 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued a
public health advisory on Monday to alert doctors to reports that
children and teen-agers with major depression thought about or
attempted suicide in several clinical trials of antidepressants.


"Nevertheless, it is not possible at this point to rule out an
increased risk of these adverse events for any of these drugs,
including Paxil (paroxetine)."

Close supervision of high-risk patients should accompany
initial drug therapy," the FDA advised.

i.e., nothing new.

nothing new?

that's correct

really ..?
its always been public knowledge that children are attempting suicide
whilst antidepressants are tested on them in clinical trials has it?


It is certainly new to the millions of people prescribed these
prescribed these drugs by a GP ..without an initial psychiatric
assessment..let alone any monitoring or supervision of any kind..close
or otherwise..

It's been on the warning lables and general print outs each patient
gets from the pharmacist for ages.

NO it has not been on inserts for "ages"
the drug companies have been forced by court cases and
been overidden by regulatory bodies..
kicking and screaming all the way to do such..


Stock prices fall as a result of such warnings.
Furthermore as global operators the amount of information revealed
...as to adversive reactions..varies from country to country depending
upon what each national legistature has insisted upon.

In any event an insert from the pharmacy hardly constitutes monitoring
or supervision..








Not to mention the hundreds of thousands ordering them on the internet
without ever seeing a doctor..

3) it notes that depression (not medication) is the leading cause of
suicide

"But it said it is hard to tell whether the drugs actually caused the
suicide, because depression is the leading cause of suicide."

hardly the same

Try reading the sentence you quoted again.

perhaps you should ..without your alterations..

no alterations jake.

(not medication) exists nowhere
in the text..it is your addition..




The report certainly does not rule out suicidal depression brought on
by medications as in the case of the Paxil "normal volunteers..

Just what part of "it said it is hard to tell whether the drugs
actually caused the suicide" do you fail to understand?

I understand it just fine.


Then why persist in the stale...
old discredited drug company spin that the suicidal ideation
has nothing to do with the drug but is a symptom of the depression?

that normal volunteers become suicidal in drug trials has totally
discredited that idea..

what part don't you understand

very droll...




just a slightly different spin than what the original poster put on it
by selectively quoting

The only spin I see is yours.

Thats probably because of your particular set of biases--Linda being
one of the biggest.

I will discuss issues ..such as children attempting suicide whilst
undergoing clinical trials for drug companies..but your obsession with
Linda you will have to deal with on your own..

I find it interesting that you have never (or not in the past two
years anyway) corrected linda when she has been blatently wrong. The
many times she has summarized an article and said something 180
degrees opposite what the article said. Not once have you called her
to task for her slander, her lies, her vindictiveness.

Who is it that is biased jake?

I will discuss issues with you but not your obsession with Linda
frankly it is really tedious..

the thread is about concern that children given ADs in clinical trials
are attempting suicide..not how much you hate another poster..

--
"Until the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior is
finally and permanently discredited and abandoned; until there is no longer any
first-class and second-class citizens of any nation; until the color of a man's
skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes; until the basic
human rights are equally guaranteed to all, without regard to race -- until
that day, the dreams of lasting peace and world citizenship and the rule of
international morality will remain but a fleeting illusion, to be pursued but
never attained."

Haile Sellassie

In news message: ,
jake typed:
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 20:54:57 -0500, Mark D Morin
wrote:

snipt

the whole thing--and when reading it NB:
1) it is acknowledging that it is saying nothing new

That the FDA is concerned enough to put out an alert is certainly new.
and headine despite your attempts at minimisation.

Not sure what you mean about how "new" this alert is - IIRC, I read the
warning *presented* in the alert close to a decade ago in a Paxil brochure.


The point appears to be twofold:

1. Some people commit suicide while under clinical trials (or afterword)
2. There isn't any way they can determine whether it's the drug's fault or
the fact(?) that the people taking the drug are, in all likelihood,
depressed, and hence at highest risk for suicide regardless of whether they
are on these medications or not.

IMO this is more of a FDA attempt to heighten general public awareness of
the risk rather than an attempt to present it as "new".

I believe you and Mark are disagreeing over interpretation based on
differences of phrasing - you appear to be contending that for the FDA to
issue an alert is new, whereas Mark appears to be contending that the
information the FDA is presenting isn't new.

So far as I can tell, you're both "right", but not for the reason the other
thinks.

Again, if I read this disagreement correctly, you are correct, AFAIK, the
FDA has not previously issued a *general* alert for public consumption
regarding the *possible* link between antiDs and rare increase in suicidal
ideation.

Mark is correct in that the information that is being presented in the alert
regarding that *possible* link is NOT new, and has been included with most
if not all antidepressant literature for quite a long time, including the
warning to the prescriber to monitor the patient's initial exposure to the
drug closely due to the *possible* risk of increased ideation.

If I misinterpreted either side, my apologies for jumping in on that
particular part of y'all's conversation.

I note that elsewhere you claimed that "normal" (presumably meaning
"non-depressed") people committed suicide while taking the drugs in question
during their trials - where did you get that from? I didn't see any hint of
such a statistic.

snipt

--
Jon Quixote
What is axiomatic frequently isn't.

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 07:46:56 GMT, "Jon Quixote"
wrote:

In news message: ,
jake typed:
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 20:54:57 -0500, Mark D Morin
wrote:

snipt

the whole thing--and when reading it NB:
1) it is acknowledging that it is saying nothing new

That the FDA is concerned enough to put out an alert is certainly new.
and headine despite your attempts at minimisation.

Not sure what you mean about how "new" this alert is - IIRC, I read the
warning *presented* in the alert close to a decade ago in a Paxil brochure.


The point appears to be twofold:

1. Some people commit suicide while under clinical trials (or afterword)
2. There isn't any way they can determine whether it's the drug's fault or
the fact(?) that the people taking the drug are, in all likelihood,
depressed, and hence at highest risk for suicide regardless of whether they
are on these medications or not.

IMO this is more of a FDA attempt to heighten general public awareness of
the risk rather than an attempt to present it as "new".

I believe you and Mark are disagreeing over interpretation based on
differences of phrasing - you appear to be contending that for the FDA to
issue an alert is new, whereas Mark appears to be contending that the
information the FDA is presenting isn't new.

So far as I can tell, you're both "right", but not for the reason the other
thinks.

Again, if I read this disagreement correctly, you are correct, AFAIK, the
FDA has not previously issued a *general* alert for public consumption
regarding the *possible* link between antiDs and rare increase in suicidal
ideation.

Mark is correct in that the information that is being presented in the alert
regarding that *possible* link is NOT new, and has been included with most
if not all antidepressant literature for quite a long time, including the
warning to the prescriber to monitor the patient's initial exposure to the
drug closely due to the *possible* risk of increased ideation.

If I misinterpreted either side, my apologies for jumping in on that
particular part of y'all's conversation.




If the FDA had listened to Mark of course..they would have realized
that would have been no need to send out this alert to all doctors
and health care professionals..
In the real world..the data from their studies convinced them there
was....

despite the attempt to generalise to suicides in general in AD treated
patients the report actually is concerned with CHILDREN who are
attempting suicide more often when taking the AD than those recieving
a placebo.
this is headline news...
here is the actual alert

http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/advisory/mdd.htm


FDA PUBLIC HEALTH ADVISORY

October 27, 2003

Subject: REPORTS OF SUICIDALITY IN PEDIATRIC PATIENTS BEING TREATED
WITH ANTIDEPRESSANT MEDICATIONS FOR MAJOR DEPRESSIVE DISORDER (MDD)

Dear Health Care Professional:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would like to call your
attention to reports of the occurrence of suicidality (both suicidal
ideation and suicide attempts) in clinical trials for various
antidepressant drugs in pediatric patients with major depressive
disorder (MDD).

While occurrences of suicidality are not unexpected in patients with
MDD, preliminary data suggest an excess of such reports for patients
assigned to several of these antidepressant drugs compared to those
assigned to placebo.


FDA has completed a preliminary review of such reports for 8
antidepressant drugs (citalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine*,
mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, sertraline, and venlafaxine)
studied under the pediatric exclusivity provision, and has determined
that additional data and analysis, and also a public discussion of
available data, are needed.

FDA plans to hold an advisory committee meeting before the
Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee and the Pediatric
Subcommittee of the Anti-Infective Drugs Advisory Committee on
February 2, 2004.

I guess they should just abandon the meeting huh?
as all the data and findings are on the insert??
sheesh..

here is the previous Talk paper that was not "ages ago "
but only four months ago

June 19, 2003

FDA Talk Paper

http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ANSWER.../ANS01230.html

FDA Statement Regarding the Anti-Depressant Paxil for Pediatric
Population

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said today it is reviewing
reports of a possible increased risk of suicidal thinking and suicide
attempts in children and adolescents under the age of 18 treated with
the drug Paxil for major depressive disorder (MDD). Although the FDA
has not completed its evaluation of the new safety data, FDA is
recommending that Paxil not be used in children and adolescents for
the treatment of MDD. There is currently no evidence that Paxil is
effective in children or adolescents with MDD, and Paxil is not
currently approved for use in children and adolescents. Other approved
treatment options are available for depression in children.

Paxil is approved for use in adults for the treatment of Obsessive
Compulsive Disorder (OCD), MDD, Panic Disorder, Social Anxiety
Disorder (SAD), Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Post-traumatic
Stress Disorder. There is no evidence that Paxil is associated with an
increased risk of suicidal thinking in adults.

Three well-controlled trials in pediatric patients with MDD failed to
show that the drug was more effective than placebo. The new safety
information that is currently under review was derived from trials of
Paxil in pediatric patients.
Following its review of the same data, the UK Department of Health
issued a Press Release on June 10 stating that paroxetine (brand name
Seroxat in the UK) must not be used to treat children and teenagers
under the age of 18 years for depressive illness because UK
authorities have concluded that there is an increase in the rate of
self harm and potentially suicidal behavior in this age group, when
paroxetine is used for depressive illness.


I note that elsewhere you claimed that "normal" (presumably meaning
"non-depressed") people committed suicide while taking the drugs in question
during their trials - where did you get that from? I didn't see any hint of
such a statistic.

No..I said became suicidal


nobody did for a long time..the drug company supressed the results of
their safety trials showing this..and only gave then to researchers
when a court forced then too..

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/s312381.htm


Researcher and academic raises questions about common anti-depressants
PRINT FRIENDLY EMAIL STORY
PM Archive - Wednesday, 13 June , 2001 00:00:00
Reporter: Mark Colvin
MARK COLVIN: Now more on a story we brought you yesterday on the
question surrounding some of the most widely prescribed
anti-depressant drugs.

The questions were raised by a researcher in Wales who has been
delving into the archives of one of the big drug companies. He's Dr
David Healy of the North Wales Department of Psychological Medicine, a
leading expert on, and critic of, anti-depressants and he's on the
line now from Wales.

Dr Healey how did you find this new information? Where, where were you
digging?

DAVID HEALY: Okay, well roughly a year-and-a-half ago now in the
university department here, we had - as part of some research - to
look at how the anti-depressants work, given one of the
anti-depressants that acts on the serotonin system - Zoloft, and
another anti-depressant that has no action from the serotonin system,
to a group of medical and nursing colleagues here.

We found that Zoloft could make some absolutely normal people better
than well, but equally it made two of our normal volunteers acutely
suicidal.

Now I've also been involved in some legal actions where people have
committed suicide or homicide on, on SSRI's [Selective Serotonin
Reuptake Inhibitor] and following our work here I was curious to look
at the healthy volunteer archives that companies like SmithKline and
Pfizer have.

MARK COLVIN: SmithKline which is now, I think, called Glaxo
SmithKline, is that right?

DAVID HEALY: That is the case yes. You see in order to get these drugs
onto the market in the first instance, they've got to do what are
phase one studies which usually involve giving the drug either once,
or over the course of a few weeks, to several hundred healthy
volunteers.

MARK COLVIN: Are these documents closely guarded secrets, or were they
easy for you to get?

DAVID HEALY: Well no they are a closely guarded secret. My
understanding is that very few other people have ever seen any of this
work. And the interesting thing about this is the companies portray
themselves as being in a scientific business, but in actual fact the
emphasis I think needs to be on the business rather than the science,
because one of the cardinal rules of science is that you make all of
your data freely available.

MARK COLVIN: Are you saying then that because of business reasons they
covered up information which they should have released?

DAVID HEALY: Well what I'm saying is the company responses on an issue
like this will be that the findings from their healthy volunteer work
is proprietary data and that you would never get a response like that
from a university department.

MARK COLVIN: But what did it say? Did it confirm your feeling that
these drugs had side effects or could give people withdrawal symptoms?

DAVID HEALY: Yes it did. What the argument from the companies has been
is when people who are depressed become suicidal or nervous on their
drug that that's the illness.

Now what the healthy volunteer work shows is that during the 1980s
when this was actually being done, several years before these drugs
reached the marketplace, that healthy volunteers being put on these
drugs were becoming agitated at a rate of up to one in four.

And in the case of Glaxo SmithKline's drug Paroxotine, they were
concerned about withdrawal problems from the drug, and showed that in
some instances when people had only been on the drug for two or three
weeks, that there were up to 85 per cent of the healthy volunteers
involved having withdrawal problems from the drug.

MARK COLVIN: Some experts here were saying there shouldn't really be
any big surprise about this because all drugs have side effects and
all drugs have some form of withdrawal symptom. Is that a fair
argument?

DAVID HEALY: Well yes, SRI's were sold as a new group of drugs, which
unlike the benzodiazepines - Valium, Librium and drugs like that -
were not going to make people physically dependant.

The withdrawal problems from Paroxotine appeared to be as great as
the, if not greater than, any of the physical dependence that was
caused by Valium and Librium during the 1980s.

MARK COLVIN: So drugs like Prozac and Seroxat, Aropax, drugs like
that, are just as physically dependent you say as drugs like Valium
which were widely blamed for addicting a lot of people and these drugs
were supposed to liberate people from that possibility of addiction.

DAVID HEALY: That's right yes, and furthermore, in some of the
clinical trial work that has been done since by the companies, what
they've done is they've done what are called long-term trials, and
during the course of these people who have appeared to respond to the
drug are then re-randomised to placebo, and when they get unwell the
companies have been saying, "well look this is evidence that they have
again become clinically depressed, and that the people who are on the
drug haven't become as likely to become depressed, and therefore this
is evidence that you should take our drug in the longer term. It will
ward off future episodes of depression".

But knowing what I know now and knowing what I believe the companies
knew then, this all looks very unsatisfactory to me now in that the
most, the simplest way to explain people becoming unwell after the
drug is halted, is in terms of a discontinuation problem from the
drug.

And rather than this being evidence that you should continue with the
drug, this really is evidence that clinicians should be thinking about
how to wean people off these drugs safely.

MARK COLVIN: Dr David Healy thank you very much indeed. Dr David Healy
of the North Wales Department of Psychological Medicine who has been
researching in the archives of Glaxo SmithKline.

"jake" wrote in message
...


It is certainly new to the millions of people prescribed these
prescribed these drugs by a GP ..without an initial psychiatric
assessment..let alone any monitoring or supervision of any kind..close
or otherwise..

Not to mention the hundreds of thousands ordering them on the internet
without ever seeing a doctor..


you realize that this is a problem with the doctors and internet drug
pushers, not with the medications themselves.

right?

-kelly

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 06:30:33 +0000, jake wrote:


AFAIAA concern with violating copyright is the issue..
rather than your uglyminded interpretations..

This is coming from someone who routinely reposts the entire article
rather than simply provide a link?


It's been on the warning lables and general print outs each patient
gets from the pharmacist for ages.

NO it has not been on inserts for "ages"

It has been here
perhaps you should ..without your alterations..

no alterations jake.

(not medication) exists nowhere in the text..it is your addition..

don't know what you are talking about jake--nothing was inserted nor
deleted in my cutting and pasting.


the thread is about concern that children given ADs in clinical trials

That's not what the thread says jake

================================================== ==
Ruby stepped toward him. "Edward," she said softly.
"Learn this from me. Holding anger is a poison. It
eats you from inside. We think that hating is a weapon
that attacks the person who harmed us. But hatred is
a curved blade. And the harm we do, we do to ourselves.
"Forgive, Edward, Forgive. Do you remember the
lightness you felt when you first arrived in heaven?...
No one is born with anger. And when we die, the soul
is freed of it. But now, here, in order to move on,
you must understand WHY you felt what you did, and WHY
you no longer need to feel it.
"Yo need to forgive your father."

Mitch Albom, "the five people you meet in heaven"

http://home.gwi.net/~mdmpsyd/index.htm

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 08:54:03 +0000, jake wrote:


despite the attempt to generalise to suicides in general in AD treated
patients the report actually is concerned with CHILDREN who are
attempting suicide more often when taking the AD than those recieving
a placebo.
this is headline news...
here is the actual alert

http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/advisory/mdd.htm

and where are the nondepressed controls you were talking about who
became suicidal?

================================================== ==
Ruby stepped toward him. "Edward," she said softly.
"Learn this from me. Holding anger is a poison. It
eats you from inside. We think that hating is a weapon
that attacks the person who harmed us. But hatred is
a curved blade. And the harm we do, we do to ourselves.
"Forgive, Edward, Forgive. Do you remember the
lightness you felt when you first arrived in heaven?...
No one is born with anger. And when we die, the soul
is freed of it. But now, here, in order to move on,
you must understand WHY you felt what you did, and WHY
you no longer need to feel it.
"Yo need to forgive your father."

Mitch Albom, "the five people you meet in heaven"

http://home.gwi.net/~mdmpsyd/index.htm

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 03:24:45 -0800, "kc"
wrote:


"jake" wrote in message
.. .


It is certainly new to the millions of people prescribed these
prescribed these drugs by a GP ..without an initial psychiatric
assessment..let alone any monitoring or supervision of any kind..close
or otherwise..

Not to mention the hundreds of thousands ordering them on the internet
without ever seeing a doctor..


you realize that this is a problem with the doctors

You blame the doctors for believing drug company disinformation and
lies?
One primary purpose of such advisories is to correct such
disinformation as to the safety and prescribing practices..

and internet drug
pushers,

sadly many such sites employ doctors on a commission only
basis to prescribe to strangers

not with the medications themselves.

nice try..

the use of SSRIs to treat depression is problematic
and of increasing concern..whatever spin might be used to hide thr
fact






right?

-kelly

"jake" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 03:24:45 -0800, "kc"
wrote:


"jake" wrote in message
.. .


It is certainly new to the millions of people prescribed these
prescribed these drugs by a GP ..without an initial psychiatric
assessment..let alone any monitoring or supervision of any kind..close
or otherwise..

Not to mention the hundreds of thousands ordering them on the internet
without ever seeing a doctor..


you realize that this is a problem with the doctors

You blame the doctors for believing drug company disinformation and
lies?

no, i blame doctors for not requiring psych consults before perscribing psyc
meds. i blame the doctors for not monitoring patients who need to be
monitored. i don't see any disinfo here. the med inserts say that suicide
is a risk in ANY depressed patient, and indeed it is. if the docs hand out
a pill and ignore a suicidal patient, how on earth can that be the drug co's
fault?

One primary purpose of such advisories is to correct such
disinformation as to the safety and prescribing practices..

execpt there was no disinformation. this advisory doesn't tell anyone
anything new.


the use of SSRIs to treat depression is problematic
and of increasing concern..whatever spin might be used to hide thr
fact

seriously, i have no idea what your little agenda is all about, but SSRIs,
among other depression treatments, save MANY more lives than you claim they
take.

i've said it before. don't like them, don't take them. but there's no
reason to wage a campaign against an entire class of meds that have saved so
many lives.

-kelly

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 08:40:42 -0500, Mark D Morin
wrote:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 06:30:33 +0000, jake wrote:


AFAIAA concern with violating copyright is the issue..
rather than your uglyminded interpretations..

This is coming from someone who routinely reposts the entire article
rather than simply provide a link?

are you being deliberately obtuse?
Its not my issue..and I did not post the
article here..






It's been on the warning lables and general print outs each patient
gets from the pharmacist for ages.

NO it has not been on inserts for "ages"

It has been here
perhaps you should ..without your alterations..

no alterations jake.

(not medication) exists nowhere in the text..it is your addition..

don't know what you are talking about jake--nothing was inserted nor
deleted in my cutting and pasting.

the words "(not medication)" arrived from where then?



the thread is about concern that children given ADs in clinical trials

That's not what the thread says jake

the thread says nothing..contributors to it do..

the subject line is

FDA Alert: Watch for Suicide of Kids on AD's 10/27/03
on my newsreader anyhow..



================================================= ===
Ruby stepped toward him. "Edward," she said softly.
"Learn this from me. Holding anger is a poison. It
eats you from inside. We think that hating is a weapon
that attacks the person who harmed us. But hatred is
a curved blade. And the harm we do, we do to ourselves.
"Forgive, Edward, Forgive. Do you remember the
lightness you felt when you first arrived in heaven?...
No one is born with anger. And when we die, the soul
is freed of it. But now, here, in order to move on,
you must understand WHY you felt what you did, and WHY
you no longer need to feel it.
"Yo need to forgive your father."

Mitch Albom, "the five people you meet in heaven"

http://home.gwi.net/~mdmpsyd/index.htm

--
"Until the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior is
finally and permanently discredited and abandoned; until there is no longer any
first-class and second-class citizens of any nation; until the color of a man's
skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes; until the basic
human rights are equally guaranteed to all, without regard to race -- until
that day, the dreams of lasting peace and world citizenship and the rule of
international morality will remain but a fleeting illusion, to be pursued but
never attained."

Haile Sellassie

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 06:37:18 -0800, "kc"
wrote:


"jake" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 03:24:45 -0800, "kc"
wrote:


"jake" wrote in message
.. .


It is certainly new to the millions of people prescribed these
prescribed these drugs by a GP ..without an initial psychiatric
assessment..let alone any monitoring or supervision of any kind..close
or otherwise..

Not to mention the hundreds of thousands ordering them on the internet
without ever seeing a doctor..


you realize that this is a problem with the doctors

You blame the doctors for believing drug company disinformation and
lies?

no, i blame doctors for not requiring psych consults before perscribing psyc
meds. i blame the doctors for not monitoring patients who need to be
monitored. i don't see any disinfo here. the med inserts say that suicide
is a risk in ANY depressed patient, and indeed it is. if the docs hand out
a pill and ignore a suicidal patient, how on earth can that be the drug co's
fault?

One primary purpose of such advisories is to correct such
disinformation as to the safety and prescribing practices..

execpt there was no disinformation. this advisory doesn't tell anyone
anything new.

really..?

you were aware of the following by some sort of
precognition or ESP then..I presume

"While occurrences of suicidality are not unexpected in patients with
MDD, preliminary data suggest an excess of such reports for patients
assigned to several of these antidepressant drugs compared to those
assigned to placebo. "

unfortunately the FDA guessed most
doctors and health care professionals did not possess your
speciaslpowers and issed an alert..










the use of SSRIs to treat depression is problematic
and of increasing concern..whatever spin might be used to hide thr
fact

seriously, i have no idea what your little agenda is all about, but SSRIs,
among other depression treatments, save MANY more lives than you claim they
take.

this was the promise..and the sales proposition..

time has proved the confidence misplaced..
it has yet to be shown that SSRIs "save childrens lives" in any way
shape or form..

i've said it before. don't like them, don't take them. but there's no
reason to wage a campaign against an entire class of meds that have saved so
many lives.

so lets just sweep the victims and ruined lives
under the carpet then...

I know..why dont we just abandon all safety and
regulatory bodies entirely..and give children whatever drugs the
multinationals see fit to produce?

--
"Until the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior is
finally and permanently discredited and abandoned; until there is no longer any
first-class and second-class citizens of any nation; until the color of a man's
skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes; until the basic
human rights are equally guaranteed to all, without regard to race -- until
that day, the dreams of lasting peace and world citizenship and the rule of
international morality will remain but a fleeting illusion, to be pursued but
never attained."

Haile Sellassie