Safest Psych Med

[btdt]

http://mentalhealthdaily.com/2015/06/28/safest-psychiatric-drugs-low-risk-effective-medications/

 

I don't know if this is true ... but I found it so you can take a look if you like

 

1. Buspar 2. Clonidine 3. Guanfacine 4. Nuvigil (Armodafinil) 5. Provigil (Modafinil) 6. Wellbutrin (Bupropion) 7. Strattera (Atomoxetine)

Plenty more at the link.

[InvisibleUnless]

i dont buy it.

 

for any drug there is, there will be people with horrible responses, people with neutralish responses, and people with good responses.  those drugs listed are not usually "lower risk" in some general way, they just have a lower average incidence or severity of very particular risks.

 

their still causing things like withdrawal syndrome, suicidality, sexual dysfunction, and "mood disorders" makes me quite reticent to say there is a list of "safer" or "safest" psychiatric drugs.  there are moreso persons with less degrees of risk, but we rarely have the ability to significantly measure the level of most of those risks.

 

saying drugs are safer because we rule some side effects as 'better' or 'worse' to deal with (like temperature dysregulation versus nausea) is oftentimes just a shell game.  they all cause unwanted effects, they can all lead to debilitation or outright disability due to those effects, and they all cause those effects in a meaningful percentage of patients.

 

and that is not even a statement against the potential usefulness of drugs.  some people find them helpful, albeit the minority.  the point is that it can be obscuring or dishonest to start drawing distinctions that cannot even apply in a deterministic manner on the individual level of patient treatment.  noting relative incidence is not necessarily misleading, but couching comparisons in unscientifically preferential terms can begin to chip away at informed consent.

 

it is also good to remember that some of those drugs are most often used as add-on prescriptions, meaning their side effects, drug interaction risks, and tapering/withdrawal stresses will most commonly be compounded in ways we do not really know enough about.  i can empathize with wanting to find the less problematic drugs for the cases where people really want to be taking them, and do not necessarily disagree with some of their inclusions if we are required to draw from those classes of drugs, but actual use situations will not necessarily be adequately represented by those run-downs.  (and references to things like discontinuation statistics from clinical trials, and genesight-type testing give the impression there is a lot of stretching going on to make things seem more meaningful than they are.)

[btdt]

(and references to things like discontinuation statistics from clinical trials, and genesight-type testing give the impression there is a lot of stretching going on to make things seem more meaningful than they are.)

 

 

We all know that and I may have just done a disservice in posting it at all.  I wonder where the blogger got the information from... I didn't ask and it may not be reliable for all I know it is a drug company posing as a blogger to push the drugs they make... yes I am jaded... still if any of it is true... maybe it could help somebody.. maybe it could hurt somebody too... why am I still gullable on some level ... I keep thinking being jaded protects me from gullable but apparently it doesn't.

Thanks for the wake up call IU I needed that

[InvisibleUnless]

ive read some interesting stuff there, on occasion.  a lot of it ends up being a little half-baked or incomplete, and some seems a bit dangerous.  the same is true for almost all sources on mental health or pharmaceuticals, and i am no expert or perfect source myself.

 

i believe i tried to add a comment about topiramate withdrawal like a year back and it kept rejecting the comment.  they have lively discussions sometimes, or interesting resources in the user comments section even if there arent back-and-forth conversations.  i think it is most useful as a place aggregating patient experiences, or priming thoughts on various connections.  they do promote some important ideas that not everyone is running with still, like antipsychotic-induced psychosis (especially as a notable withdrawal symptom): http://mentalhealthdaily.com/2014/04/16/can-withdrawal-from-antipsychotics-cause-psychosis/

 

when it comes to psychotropics, most of what you hear about usefulness and preferential regard is arbitrary.  it is just philosophical posturing, and whether or not someone specific benefits is much more individualistic.  having information out there can be good, but patients need to learn how to vet their sources and be more independent in their decisionmaking either way.  i think there is no need to trust particular sources; why let down your critical guard just because someone says some things you agree with?  i know you sometimes feel paranoid about dr healy, for instance.  i think that is perfectly normal.  take what you can be constructive with, and dont let the rest keep you from progressing in your own understanding and recovery.

 

ultimately, no one else can determine how well we are, or act.  it is good to advocate for informed consent---which means getting research and patient experiences pertaining to things like withdrawal disseminated---but we cannot bring down big pharma or crooked doctors as a practice or anyone of the other faceless entities, and doing so would not really solve the mental healthcare crisis.  they will all fall, inevitably, but we are still left with our personal responsibility to care for our own health.  spend enough energy to help other people make better decisions, but not enough to worry much about shifty motives, i say.

 

sometimes your post topics are scattershot, but you dig up some interesting things.  i wouldnt want you to stop being around or sharing.

[btdt]

I just found it yesterday odd if it is a person they have not found SA maybe they have.