Experts Defining Mental Disorders Are Linked to Drug Firms

Every psychiatric expert involved in writing the standard diagnostic criteria for disorders such as depression and schizophrenia has had financial ties to drug companies that sell medications for those illnesses, a new analysis has found.

Of the 170 experts in all who contributed to the manual that defines disorders from personality problems to drug addiction, more than half had such ties, including 100 percent of the experts who served on work groups on mood disorders and psychotic disorders. The analysis did not reveal the extent of their relationships with industry or whether those ties preceded or followed their work on the manual.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/19/AR2006041902560_pf.html

...if in years to come it'll be like 'Dawn of the Dead' with quasi-Zombies everywhere. :nopity:

for using that term.

americans have been medically conned.

and that is an excellent term that I will be using from now on.

Medical Industrial Complex is apt too - just how much corporate money feeds the medical community - lots as we all know.

They're a small subset of DUers. (Or is that a subset of small DUers?)

They laugh at everybody. They strut around claiming to be the rightful gatekeepers of Science, but just about none of them are scientists. Most of the ones who are, are undistinguished in their fields of study. "Silly" isn't just a word they use to belittle their targets, it is their preferred strategy. Most consider "debunking" UFOs, astrology, and Christianity to be more pressing problems than the corruption of scientific and medical research.

I once worked for one of the epidemiologists who complained about this form of scientific prostitution in the 1990s, and he faced a category-5 shitstorm from "outraged" scientists who waved their credentials and speechified about "Peer Review". Of course, they were all receiving honoraria (academic bribes) from drug companies. The epidemiologist, fortunately, was one of the pioneers of modern clinical pharmacology. He literally "wrote the book" on the subject, and his name carried a lot more weight than the marketing departments of the companies.

One hundred thousand Americans die each year from what are euphemistically characterized as drug errors. Not street drugs that are self-administered, or even vitamins or herbs, but ethical drugs prescribed by licensed physicians. I can only guess how much of this is due to the deliberate exclusion of information about the adverse effects of these drugs. Physicians, the footsoldiers of Medicine, depend on being told the truth -- not being sold lies hiding behind repeated invocations of "Evidence-Based Medicine" and "Peer Review".

--p!

is the systematic pattern of witholding evidence of adverse effects- or simply not publishing research where the data isn't favorable to their "clients" interests.

I would seldom advise someone to see a Psychiatrist for this reason.
Other professional help, but not those who are so pill oriented.

DemEx

and there is almost no behavioral therapy offered as a matter of course.

I understand the use of meds, especially to break chemical cycles in the brain. And I can even live with the notion certain people might require meds their whole lives. But to have NO behavioral therapy involved. No dietary guidelines. It's just really, really sad.

It's a sympton of the Materialism that lies at the heart of today's Medical Science. The Body is a machine to be altered with chemicals and forget the role of the Mind and Psyche.

and those whose lives depend on it - for survival and/or quality!
But I would never send my children, for example, to a psychiatrist because I pretty much know that they would have medications to offer, when I would want other forms of support and guidance explored very extensively first.

Hope your brothers are doing well, cryingshame,

DemEx

how to properly conduct psychotherapy. Simple requests for basic advice or feedback on things like interpersonal matters, for example, are often considered too beneath a psychiatrist. And it's difficult, if not outright impossible, to find a psychiatrist who's willing to allow the patient to dictate the topic of conversation. Want to talk about, say, your teen years when a parent persistently maintained that you'll end up a complete failure in life no matter how hard you try (as an example)? Well, that doesn't fall under the category of "the first five years of life" or Freudian sexual fantasies (or whatever), so the shrink will quickly force a change in subject after making a brief comment on your concern.

Unfortunately, I have my doubts even about the abilities of psychologists and other non-MD therapists. There just might not be anyone in the counseling field who knows what they're doing in certain kinds of cases.

Just like GPs you have to try them until you find one who treats you the way you expect to be treated.

Psychiatrists are not psychologists, they are not trained for psychology. It is unfair to expect them to be what they aren't.

A good combination of medical treatment and psychotherapy (of the right type) can help mood disorders.

hear hear.

Big Pharma is one of the co-owners of this administration.
Wasn't Cheney a Big Pharma CEO or Board Member?

He is the one making money off the Tamiflu vaccine.

Thanks.

I went through a severe depression awhile back.

Nobody wanted to help me, except by giving me drugs. I didn't want drugs, I wanted HELP, someone to listen, someone who could understand what I was going through. An unbiased ear to advise me on what I was dealing with. That kind of help is REALLY hard to find. They all want to do is give you drugs. If you refuse, they threaten hospitalization.

if you present a credible threat to yourself or others.

IE you say you are going to hang yourself or shoot your boss.

You can not be hospitalized for being depressed.

All I remember is that the threat (and that's how I perceived it) scared the crap out of me so I never went back.

Somehow or other I got better. When I was well into "recovery" I found a counselor who promised not to push drugs on me. He helped me tremendously through the final stages of my depression.

This is a good reminder for us all to know where our info comes from.

the most commonly "diagnosed" conditions are those for which there is a medication. Since this changes over time, so do the diagnoses (now it's "bipolar"). It should be the other way around, but the very idea of the DSM was to be a-theoretical. And without theory, no understanding and no progress. Just merchandises and objects that change with the market. Reaction against psychoanalysis threw the baby, the tub and the whole bathroom with the water.

The tenor of this thread is quite negative toward psych meds, but there are two sides to this. I have known many who would say that the positive effects of psych medications have enabled them to get on with their lives, and some who would say that their meds are a godsend (especially some of the newer anti-depressants).

That being said, I have not been impressed with psychiatry, and if I needed such assistance I would first go to a licensed clinical psychologist with both a PhD and a good reputation. If he/she believed meds might help, I'd get them from a trusted family physician. There are many reasons for this... I reached this conclusion after working in the field for many years.

I'm not a zomby and my celexa has allowed me to have a normal, happy life. My Concerta was a godsend. It's a load of crap to believe that a genetic condition (ADD) is grown out of. My psychiatrist is my prescriber and he and I work together as a team to figure out what works best in the medicine department and my psychologist is the one I've been working with to help me with the circumstances of my life.

I do agree that the marriage of Big Pharma and the physicians is a marriage of great evil. But I don't care to throw out the baby with the tainted bathwater.

Without meds I am almost non-functional and sometimes suicidal. I suffered for years as a child, before people were aware that children could be depressed. Later I got a lot of talk therapy, but still had major problems. Finally I was properly diagnosed and got the right medication. It has made the difference between merely existing and actually living.

.... you should do your own research any time a drug is prescribed to you and ESPECIALLY if it is a drug you will be taking a long time.

The SSRI-type drugs are a miracle worker for the truly clinically depressed. But they have some nasty side effects. If you are suffering through a situational depression, or if your depression os milder in nature, you might be better off just roughing it out.

Many other drugs designed for long term chronic use are very expensive, have sides that are not talked about, and are sometimes worse than the underlying disease they are supposed to treat.

Like pretty much every thing else in America, including education, religion, and law enforcement - drugs are a BUSINESS. Be a smart consumer.

In my case, although I suffer from major depression, the cure is worse than the disease. The side effects of irritability alienates all my friends--one of them wants to beat the shit out of me when I'm on, or getting off, those meds.

Bad thing about it: my doctor won't listen to me when I bring up this concern, so I don't take my meds because of the side effects.

and its advanced related condition, avoidance disorder, is anti-anxiety medication coupled WITH therapy. I think that a lot of psychiatrists in particular don't bother with the therapy...they just throw pills. Same with depression issues.

Not good.

And I would surmise that psychiatrists don't bother with the therapy for two reasons:

1) Many simply do not know how to provide it. I have seen a great many in action, and with a very few exceptions, they truly have not been trained to provide psychotherapy.

2) Even if they were trained to provide psychotherapy, there is a financial disincentive to provide it. It takes time.

Anxiety disorders, such as agoraphobia (and others) require psychotherapy. Meds alone seldom work, but I have seen people with anxiety disorders who have been completely turned around when provided with a combination of the two.

We are so overmedicated. No strike that, I think we are falsely medicated. I concede that there are some folks who without a doubt need medication, but for christsakes I don't know to many people who don't have some disorder. There is a pill for everything. Somebody is making a dollar. I think the so called experts have taken what was once personality characteristics and turned them into the ailment of the month. What ever happened to personal accountability for ones flaws? What ever happened to realizing where your problems stem from and working to CHANGE the behaviors? It is so easy to blame things that are in our own control on the latest psychological blue light special.


Oh and by the way, there will never be a pill to cure an asshole.

Whether it's legal or illegal everyone is one some sort of "DOPE"! We take pills for everything. We take pills to wake up, pills to sleep, pills for this ache and that ache, pills to piss, pills to shit, pills to walk, run and cry. Pills to exercise, pills to not have to exercise. Hell our kids are just following our footsteps in becoming "DOPE-HEADS" too! :crazy: :freak::headbang: :scared:

So that they could prescribe drugs for it. I forget where I saw that.

and any kind of natural thing a disorder to be treated.

Are staple anti anxiety and anti depressants. They are generic and old.

Some SSRI drugs are effective for people and have less serious side effects.

Mood disorders have no diagnosable genetic markers (yet). This leaves doctors using intuition and experience more than a heart surgeon for example.

They should disclose their ties however these drugs save lives. 30 thousand dead from suicide in 01. 130,000 hospitalized with serious attempts.

This should not become a rant on if the drugs work only how they are prescribed. (IMHO)

I see you only have 98 posts-have you tried Anxietybeagoner? Side effects include nasal discharge, rashes, snoring, and the inablity to ever laugh at yourself again.

I have NO love for drug companies, but I am a psychiatric epidemiologist, so I know what I'm talking about. Big Pharma actually offer research grants that have NOTHING to do with drugs. I was shocked to learn that a Post-Doc in my program applied for a $120,000 grant to study race-based disparities in the prevalence of schizophrenia from PFIZER. No meds, no genes, no biomarkers. Her research largely focuses on social factors.

While many, meny shrinks do make a LOT of money (and increase their number of publications by writing up (or signing onto) results from clinical trials) some may have ties to drug companies for other, more acceptable (at least to me) reasons.

Also, the DSM offers no treatment suggestions -- only symptoms, course, criteria, etc. So unless we think that shrinks will say "turning green" is a symptom of depression only because Eli Lilly found their drug 'Metroflex' removes green pallor, it shouldn't be too much of a problem.

If you're interested in this mariage of psych/pharma check out David Healy's books.

(retired) who was never a fan of over-medicating - quite conservative about that sort of thing - who told me that it is difficult to find unbiased information about drugs and such in the journals. The Pharmaceutical companies have taken them over and they like to control conferences also. It's a problem even when they want to know what's really going on.

so the diagnostic criteria and coding have been through a ton of clinical practice and criticism. If it weren't for the ongoing (and tedious and political) process for DSM V, this would hardly be a story worth printing at this point.

Healy's an interesting fellow. A couple of years ago during the Paxil hearings (where the FDA suppressed their own lead researcher's meta-analysis and banned his testimony) Healy sent an extensive letter outlining his findings re: increased incidence of suicide in adolescent and pediatric patients. It was on the web at the time- and it just slammed the pharmaceutical industry and the agency. Apparently, the MHRA was more receptive (and as I recall halted pediatric use of paxil about 8 months earlier).

His latest barbs at the drug companies look like they are aimed backhandedly at proponents of bipolar spectrum and expanded subtypes- guys like Kleman and Akiskal. He disputes the most recent prevalence figures of around 5%.

Personally, I think he's incorrect, but here's a quick article that shows where he's coming from:

Drug firms encourage manic depression, says academic

Drug companies are in danger of creating an epidemic of bipolar disorder (manic depressive illness) in order to boost sales of mood stabiliser drugs, an academic from Cardiff University will argue at a conference this week. Professor David Healy, Director of the School of Medicine's North Wales sub-department of Psychological Medicine will present his paper The Latest Mania: selling bi-polar disorder, at an inaugural conference on Disease Mongering at the Royal Newcastle Hospital, Australia.

Bipolar disorder is characterised by moods that alternate between two emotional extremes, or poles. Professor Healy acknowledges that bipolar disorder is one of the most debilitating and serious psychiatric diseases but he stresses that the disorder may be described as rare, affecting 0.1 per cent of the world population, with an incidence of about 10 per million of the population.

Professor Healy said: "No drug company is going to be interested in bipolar disorder, unless the prevalence of the disorder can be greatly increased. Since 1980 when the term first entered the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, various forms of bipolar have emerged, and in recent years bipolar prevalence has been pitched as high as 5 per cent of the population.

"Adverts that encourage mood watching risk transforming variations from an emotional even keel into potential indicators of latent or actual bipolar disorder."

http://www.newswales.co.uk/?section=Health&F=1&id=8786

whores for pharmaceuticals. Psychologist or counselors working with your family doctor is a safer bet. Used to be in the field.