Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Moody Is the New Bipolar

By Bruce E. Levine, Z Magazine. Posted November 14, 2007.


The author of a new book on depression shows how Big Pharma is cashing in on drugs that aren't likely to help mood disorders.
20071114story
20071114story

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Bruce E. Levine

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

In Eugene Jarecki's documentary film Why We Fight, about the U.S. military-industrial complex, U.S. foreign policy critic Chalmers Johnson states: "I guarantee you when war becomes that profitable, you are going to see more of it." Similarly, as mental illness has become extremely profitable, we are seeing more of it.

On September 4, 2007, the New York Times reported, "The number of American children and adolescents treated for bipolar disorder increased 40-fold from 1994 to 2003 ... Drug makers and company-sponsored psychiatrists have been encouraging doctors to look for the disorder."

Not too long ago, a child who was irritable, moody, and distractible and who at times sounded grandiose or acted without regard for consequences was considered a "handful." In the U.S. by the 1980s, that child was labeled with a "behavioral disorder" and today that child is being diagnosed as "bipolar" and "psychotic" -- and prescribed expensive antipsychotic drugs. Bloomberg News, also on September 4, 2007, reported, "The expanded use of bipolar as a pediatric diagnosis has made children the fastest-growing part of the $11.5 billion U.S. market for antipsychotic drugs."

Psychopathologizing young people is not the only reason for the dramatic rise in sales of such antipsychotics as Eli Lilly's Zyprexa and Johnson & Johnson's Risperdal (each, in recent years, grossing annually from $3 to $4 billion). Much of Big Pharma's antipsychotic boon is attributable to generous U.S. government agencies, especially Medicaid. The Medicaid gravy train has been fueled by Big Pharma corruption so over-the-top that it has been the subject of recent media exposures.

The Associated Press, on August 21, 2007, reported, "A groundbreaking Minnesota law is shining a rare light into the big money that drug companies spend on members of state advisory panels who help select which drugs are used in Medicaid programs for the poor and disabled." Those advisory panels -- dominated by physicians -- have great influence over the $28 billion spent by Medicaid on drugs, but only Minnesota, Vermont, and Maine require drug companies to report monies paid to physicians. The AP article focused on John E. Simon, a psychiatrist on the Minnesota advisory panel since 2004, who received $489,000 from Eli Lilly between 1998 and 2006. The top drugs paid for by Minnesota Medicaid, according to the AP article, have been antipsychotic drugs, especially Eli Lilly's Zyprexa.

Serotonin Deficiency and WMDs

With the advent of Eli Lilly's serotonin-enhancer Prozac at the end of 1987, the general public and doctors began receiving a multi-billion dollar marketing blitz proclaiming that depression is caused by a deficiency of serotonin, and that this deficiency could be corrected by Prozac (and, later, other serotonin-enhancer antidepressants such as Zoloft, Paxil, Celexa, Lexapro, and Luvox). Between 1987 and 1997, the percentage of Americans in outpatient treatment for depression more than tripled. Of those in treatment, the percentage prescribed medication almost doubled. In 1985 the total annual sales for all antidepressants in the U.S. was approximately $240 million, while today it is approximately $12 billion. In 2006, the American Journal of Psychiatry reported that the percentage of American adults with major depression in 1991 was 3.33 percent, but by 2001, the percentage had more than doubled to 7.06 percent.

The serotonin-deficiency theory of depression was so successfully marketed that it was news to many Americans when Newsweek's February 26, 2007 cover story, "Men and Depression," mentioned that scientists now reject the theory that depression is caused by low levels of neurotransmitters such as serotonin. Thomas Insel, director of the National Institute of Mental Health, told Newsweek that "a depressed brain is not necessarily underproducing something."

The demise of the serotonin-deficiency theory of depression should not be considered news in 2007 because in 1998 The American Medical Association Essential Guide to Depression was already stating: "The link between low levels of serotonin and depressive illness is unclear, as some depressed people have too much serotonin." That same year Elliot Valenstein, professor emeritus of psychology and neuroscience at the University of Michigan, in his book Blaming the Brain pointed out, "Furthermore, there is no convincing evidence that depressed people have a serotonin or norepinephrine deficiency." (Antidepressants that increase the neurotransmitter norepinephrine as well as serotonin include Effexor and Cymbalta). In 2002 the New York Times reported: "Researchers knew that antidepressants seemed to raise the brain's levels of messenger chemicals called neurotransmitters, so they theorized that depression must result from a deficiency of these chemicals. Yet a multitude of studies failed to prove this precept." Unfortunately, that fact was buried under more than fifty preceding paragraphs.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: mental health, pharmaceuticals, depression, pharma, eli lilly, paxil, zoloft, prozac, anti-depressants, serotonin, zyprexa, celexa, lexapro, luvox

Bruce E. Levine, Ph.D., is a clinical psychologist and author of Surviving America's Depression Epidemic: How to Find Morale, Energy, and Community in a World Gone Crazy (Chelsea Green, 2007).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Zyprexa used for depression
Posted by: DanielHaszard on Nov 14, 2007 12:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
An expensive powerful anti-psychotic like Zyprexa works as a major tranquilizer it makes you sleepy sometimes very sleepy and inhibits development.They also have serious side effects like up to a ten times greater risk of getting type 2 diabetes.

Lilly's incentive not to readily disclose deadly side affects (up to ten times diabetes risk over non users) is they had billions coming in from state medicaid scripts?

Daniel Haszard http://www.zyprexa-victims.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Depression IS NOT Bi-Polar Syndrome
Posted by: Turkiye on Nov 14, 2007 2:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Levine, correct re; the profiteers of pushing drugs for psychatric illnesses, mentioned 1 study about 1 boy, that at that age should not be on psychiatric medication of any sort, due to increased suicide rates.
Being Bi-polar since my teens, now 51, misdiagnosed as clinically depressed until 40, anti-depressants, when Bi-polar triggers severe manic episodes at times triggering psychosis. The author should use care when speaking about drugs that will help or hinder mental illness, he may have caused irreparable harm.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Gullibility: the new mental illness. Posted by: ABetterFuture
Bi-Polar is the replacement word for Schizophrenic.
Posted by: Nightstallion on Nov 14, 2007 3:54 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the last half of the last Century lived a man who wrote the definitive and seminal work on Character Analysis. His name was Wilhelm Reich. Google him, look him up and by God read him and try not to pre-judge him according to some ill formed social squeamishness on your own part.

Virtually none of the people who have a degree in Psychology or Psychiatry today have read anything by him or know anything of him, but will profess to know all About him because they have read someone else’s work that proclaims to know and understand Reich’s’ work. This is the way of the lazy thinker: trust anyone else’s opinion more than your own

These idiots should be set to grinding wheat. No one is schizophrenic who has a good understanding of “self” without ego involvement. Now that statement right there is enough to put today’s Psychoanalyst off his feed. Reason: He is taught that good insight is dissociative thought process! There are no Psychoanalysts anymore anyway only behavior modifiers.

You need fixing and we will drug you into submission with chemicals that leave you in a state mimicking lobotomization. No cognitive thinking allowed! Frankly, the societal drift toward Fascism that has occurred in the last twenty years bears directly on the way Psychiatry is viewed as a whole. Look for enforced Psychosurgery to rear its ugly head again soon.

In this persons opinion the only cure for the Surgeon addicted to Psycho Surgery is being put against the wall and introduced to hollow pointed Forty-five Caliber rounds from a drum fed Thompson Machine Gun. Please people, think here do not allow these serpents to get in a position of power and authority again or they will reduce whole populations to a state bordering on the far side of Idiocy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» OLD news ... Time Marches On Posted by: BenCaxton12
» Huh? Posted by: emoryricketson
This is a truism
Posted by: goeswithness on Nov 14, 2007 5:14 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't have training in prescribing drugs, but the author's opening paragraph, showing a lack of education on the subject, isn't encouraging. As someone in the field of special education, I can assure you that behavioral disorders and mood disorders, while mutually influential if they both exist, are not the same thing. I can also tell you that kids with behavioral disorders are much more than "a handful." By starting off with these, uh, old wives' tales, you show a lack of background, unless a willfull misstatement. As in any profession, it's discouraging when people come along with no training and experience, assume they know better than those who work with situations every day, and start throwing around their ill-considered assumptions as truth.

Just another example of "truthiness." And I would add, a touch of hysteria.

Of course anyone interested in a child's welfare doesn't want one to be on any medication they don't need to be, and I'm no fan of the way drugs are sold to us these days, but when considering very real quality of life issues, where a child may or may not function in the world, depending on treatment, where he or she may get further and further behind other kids, depending on treatment, and the child's social and academic problems snowball to levels more and more painful with larger consequences, it would be cruel and unethical not to explore available therapies. Much more so than with adults, with kids, time is of the essence. Special education teachers have nothing to do with prescribing drugs and, in my training, aren't even allowed to steer parents in that direction, but I have seen them really do some wonderful things.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: This is a truism Posted by: tnystel
» RE: This is a truism Posted by: DaBear
Just watch tv
Posted by: bomec on Nov 14, 2007 5:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just watch tv for an evening and count the number of ads that say "Ask your doctor if ___(fill in the blank with new drug being pushed in the ad)____ is right for you." Such ads are omnipresent and encourage viewers to ascribe to themselves some pathological condition they never even heard of and most certainly do NOT have. But if we continue on the path to becoming a nation of hypochondriacs and pill poppers, drugged byond rational thought, that is precisely the wet dream of big pharma. In fact we are already there, which is why the "pig" pharma industry wields such power in the halls of Congress.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» beware hyperbole! Posted by: emoryricketson
» RE: Just watch tv Posted by: jroth420
» RE: Just watch tv Posted by: VannaLaRoche
Don't throw the baby out with the bath water
Posted by: lb on Nov 14, 2007 5:44 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would be the first one to argue against the "big business" aspects of the practice of medicine, including psychiatry. But, some of your points are misleading. Just because the "serotonin deficiency" theory does not explain mood disorders, it doesn't mean that genetic and neurochemical factors aren't important. We have learned an amazing amount about brain biochemistry in the past 20 years, and expect to learn more in the next 20 years.
What it comes down to, for me, as a physician, is whether I can relieve suffering and "cause no harm". Some of the therapeutic effect of medication is ALWAYS placebo effect, but if people feel better and function better, why shouldn't they take these medications?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Thanks Posted by: bookie
Mrs. Christ
Posted by: jane.christ@bluewin.ch on Nov 14, 2007 5:45 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your article on the use of anti-depressives and the prtacitces of drug companies combines apples and oranges. There are many good medications out there and experienced clinicians are successfully treating depressed people of various diagnoses. Why not have an experienced clinician write an article on the state of the art of depression treatment rather than a person who seems only interested in tooting his own horn. Psychologists ,as you know, as yet cannot prescribe medications . Maybe the author is a case of sour grapes ?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» sour grapes? Posted by: DogMa
never mind terrorism, the drug giants are killing us slow but sure
Posted by: yale on Nov 14, 2007 5:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our medical system has fallen prey to profiteering. The A.M.A. is doing nothing about the fact. In 15 to 20 years, our hospitals will be so overloaded with poisoned livers from the over use of pharma drugs, that you may have to wait 2 or 3 weeks to get in to have a basic procedure taken care of, such as a broken bone, or simple day surgery. The A.M.A. is no longer at our bedside, as americans. The organization has crumbled into a corrupt cash grab, and this is the greatest threat to our country at the present. Getting this organization back on track to the original cargo of buisness should be of great interest to us all. Letting them go unchecked is more dangerous to us, than some third world country that wants to play out acts of terror on our shores.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Here's The Link Posted by: Stoney 12+1
Tower of Psychobabel
Posted by: wilty on Nov 14, 2007 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am bi-polar, having been for years subject to mis-diagnoses,
Adustment Disorder through Major Depression, to my current labeling. Who knows, maybe tomorrow, I'll be typed as Scizo-affective.

Even if there was such a thing as "pure science," I know that,
through it all, I am just a guinea pig as to to the big psycho picture. If one has never experienced a psychotic manic break, they have no experience to draw from, when it comes to empathy and the understanding of what a relief it is, that
there are stabilizing meds, such as Risperdone (an atypical anti-psychotic). In those moments, I don't give an owl's hoot, if it were M&M's acting as placebo.

Certainly, these drugs are not the magic bullets, they were once claimed to be. Their effectiveness declines, after time and the patient again goes on that critical journey to find a new med that will work. Meds for the severely crushing depressive episodes, and an Rx for the frightening assension into manic carnival time on speed. Yikes!!

Sure, there is corruption in Big Pharma, just like everywhere else, in our culture. No institution on through to the last societal nook and cranny is any longer exempt. This is the "American Way." Think Reagan. Know Bush!! Get it?

Nothing is going to change, and that includes treatment for mental illness until we adopt a brand NEW ethos. WE must change.

And to that, I say "Good luck!!!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yes, but...
Posted by: Pintado_Petrel on Nov 14, 2007 6:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't have a problem with antidepressants. I have a problem with mass-marketing of drugs to folks who do not understand what they do.

For the vast majority of the population, any kind of mind-changing medecine is just NOT necessary--but for the few folks who are really, really sick, they are a lifesaver. Same as getting a gastric bypass surgery. There are some people who are so critically obese that the cure, even with all its problems, is worth doing. Somebody like me who is packing on a few extra pounds, well, it'd be overkill.

The author seems to wander around her point quite a bit. Are antidepressants or antipsychotics bad? Is handing out drugs en mass bad, or is she criticizing the fact that big pharma is a lobby?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yes, but... Posted by: jroth420
» RE: Yes, but... Posted by: VannaLaRoche
Big Pharma has been doing this for 70 years since the ban on CANNIBAS !
Posted by: maxpayne on Nov 14, 2007 7:00 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So what the fuck does the author expect ?!?!? That Big Pharma is going to clean up its fucking act when they know that the currently RIGGED "capitalism" was set up in its fucking favor ?!?!? Bruce should be fighting with Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich to LEGALIZE CANNIBAS instead of merely throwing stones at Big Pharma ! No wonder we're all forced into the LOSERS' column !!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» IT'S TRUE!!! Posted by: garry minor
» Hi Garry, quick question. Posted by: maxpayne
Pretty Crappy Article --
Posted by: BenCaxton12 on Nov 14, 2007 7:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm saying this as someone who has managed a lifelong depression both without and with 3 generations of anti-depressive medications -- who is under no illusions whatever about Psychiatrists, Psychiatry, and how HMO medicine and the "War on Drugs" exaggerate their naturally occurring shortcomings as doctors and as human beings.

The 'hook' on which the article hangs is essentially the Scientology argument, that since there is no simple blood test proving the Seritonin Theory, the clinical outcomes achieved with medications are simply part of a greedy, irresponsible scheme by drug companies to ... yadda yadda yadda ... and oh yeah, all those so-called "Medical Doctors" are in on the plot because Big Phama gives them promotional gifts and golf weekends.

Here's the thing about bipolar disorder:

Now that there's 'a simple pill' to treat it, the condition will probably be way over-diagnosed by School Therapists and Nurse Practitioners who have no business diagnosing in the first place.

But, the disease does exist. It doesn't get better by itself . And you really don't want to 'just live with it.' Nor do you much want to live with someone who has it. Combine the chronic negativity and occasional suicide dramas of deep Depression, with the impulsivity, unreason, hallucinations and delusions of Schizophrenia -- throw in some 72 hour bouts of insomnia -- and you've got some notion of how the disease affects people.

Alternating lithium and antidepressants eventually kills your liver and kidneys.

"Atypical anti psychotic medications" do allow more people to live better lives with fewer side effects than the older methods. The about them is, if you don't really need them, you REALLY don't want to take them.

The BIG warning that this is VERY SERIOUS medication ought to be the instruction that they are to be taken with 500-800 calories from FAT 'at bedtime' --- long story short: without a rigorous program of diet and athletic training, expect weight gains of 10-15% each year you're on the drug.

Then there's the published list of other side effects.

All of which sounds quite bad ... until you compare to treating schizophrenia with Psychoanalysis, prayer, and "healthy living" ... or treating it with Old Order anti psychotics such as Thorazine.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Cannabinoids for bi-polar!
Posted by: garry minor on Nov 14, 2007 7:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All humans, reptiles, and birds have cannabinoid receptors throughout their body. Cannabis cannot kill you! In fact it is good for you. Cannabis has been proven to promote the growth of brain cells and destroy tumors. In Canada and Europe cannabis is being used quite successfully to treat Alzheimers, MS, epilepsy, bi-polar, autism, arthritis, migraine, chronic pain, nausea, diabetes, depression, glaucoma, obesity, cystic fibrosis, asthma, emphysema, herpes, Parkinsons, Huntingtons, Tourettes, Crohns disease, and more. The only side effects are an increased appetite, which is healthy, and it makes you happy!!! Is that allowed? There is NO DETOX for cannabis.
Unfortunately for us our own Government and FDA have allowed the racist, moronic, ungodly, antichristian worldview imposed by the first drug czar Harry Anslinger, the Hearst, Dupont and other Corporations of that era to continue to this day.
Cannabis is illegal because everything made from oil, coal, timber, or cotton can be made with it. All paper, plastics, packaging, paints, varnishes, textiles, rope, lubricants, netting, pressed board products, structural components, many health foods, cosmetics, and medicines can all be made with ecologically friendly kaneh bosm, cannabis, hemp! In 1938 Popular Mechanics wrote that it could be the first billion dollar crop and could provide over 25,000 products. Henry Ford built and fueled a car primarily with hemp. Synthetic plastics were developed using cellulose technology. The hemp seed is the single most nutritious thing you can eat. Our Government stockpiles it under Executive order #12919 yet deny it to us today. It would revolutionize our diet. This seed could also replace the need for hormones and remnants in our feedstock which is why American beef is banned in Europe. These additives are related to the BSE's in our foodchain which are shown to cause plaque and mental deterioration in some people. Hemp industrialization will create millions of jobs from the farm to the laboratory. It will begin a re-distribution of wealth.
The Pharmaceutical and all these other industries will stop at nothing to keep the public ignorant about the value of hemp. They promote themselves! The D.A.R.E. program is funded mainly by Kimberly-Clark, the paper company. They will watch the world burn before they give up control. Every year alcohol and tobacco kill a million people and cost us billions of dollars in health care, creating all kinds of problems. These industries also continue the fight against cannabis. Cannabis on the other hand has not killed one person in the entire history of mankind, can be used in place of either alcohol and tobacco safely, even treating the illness caused by them.
Something is wrong with this picture!
www.thc-ministry.org
time4hemp.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Cannabinoids for bi-polar! Posted by: jroth420
» RE: Cannabinoids for bi-polar! Posted by: psychochurch
simple confussion
Posted by: emoryricketson on Nov 14, 2007 7:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The "theory" that selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (Paxil, Prozac, et. al.) work by their action on serotonin is a separate question from whether they work at all. Serotonin action is unproven and looking less likely as an explanation of why they work as research continues. The research established fact that they DO work for many people is unaffected by theories of causation. There are several other ideas under investigation to help explain WHY they work.

emory

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

SSRI OVERUSE IS A NATIONAL SCANDAL
Posted by: drricklippin on Nov 14, 2007 8:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks Dr Levine and AlterNet-

In some cases SSRIs save lives.

In most cases they are "treating" social dysfuntion like family, economic and job problems

I have written on this topic on www. medicationsense.com
(scroll down to July/Sept 2004)

Many others have written good articles on this topic. Just google it.

This "medicalization or disease mongering" is a national disgrace

I won't be happy until BigPhRMA CEOs do jail time

Dr. Rick Lippin
http://medicalcrises.blogspot.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THE NEW NORMAL
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Nov 14, 2007 8:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The 'definition' of normal has become very narrow. It doesn't take much to be 'diagnosed' with something or other. People in need of medical care get lost in the shuffle. TV and a treadmill type existence doesn't allow for much of a life. For whatever reason people have a need for fun, pleasure and laughter. Feeling good. That's gone and replaced with sarcasm and annoying one liners. And every body is busy. Time to get rid of the clutter that's making people and kids nuts. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

please walk in my shoes...
Posted by: Janet4784 on Nov 14, 2007 9:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've lived with clinical depression for most of my life. Anti-depressants literally saved my life. I could not have gone on in so much pain and would have eventually committed suicide. I know big pharma, like any other corporate dragon, rakes in immoral profits. But in some cases, like mine, I say a prayer of thanks every day for the meds that keep me alive and hopeful. Please remember us before throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: please walk in my shoes... Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: please walk in my shoes... Posted by: VZEQICVA
Normal-Abnormal
Posted by: aberdeen on Nov 14, 2007 9:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is normal for adults and even more normal for children, to have mood swings. It is normal to feel happy when things go our way and to feel angry, upset and depressed when they don't. That is how human beings are "hard-wired" for survival and other reasons.

It is abnormal for human beings to be in a perpetual state of "normalcy". It is abnormal for children to be well-behaved and to not be restless from sitting for far too long in far too often boring classroom environments. It is abnormal for children to always behave as adults want them to behave.

It doesn't take a PhD in behavioral science to understand that. Any moron knows that mood swings are normal. What is abnormal, are moron educators and social "experts" who believe there is something wrong with a child who exhibits various mood swings.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Normal-Abnormal Posted by: DaBear
Mood change through subtracting chemicals
Posted by: PaulK on Nov 14, 2007 10:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Chemically sensitive people are the tip of the iceberg. They are affected within 30 seconds of exposure to perfumes, magic markers, pesticides, ... These airborne chems pass through the nose-brain barrier to the brain's mood center. Little kids and people with alzheimers regularly start screaming and hitting on exposure. Everybody else tries to control their actions; uncontrolled sobbing is typical for them. The question is, do these same chemicals subclinically affect the moods of 50% of the American public? What's in your air?

Next, artificial colorings set off a lot of kids. They're rather strongly allergic to the chemical. So does the caffeine machine in the school cafeteria. Or maybe it's all that high-fructose corn syrup.

Dishonorable chemical mention: fattening hormones in feedlots. They work twice!! We jiggle in and out of our cars for a reason, and yes 400 lbs affects our mood.

Doctors need to look at causes, not cures. Unfortunately they're all locked away in offices, far from the front lines.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Doctors? Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: Doctors? Posted by: PaulK
Let's be real here...
Posted by: Pirate1 on Nov 14, 2007 10:31 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People are depressed, physically ill, miserable in so many ways because we never evolved to be what we are continually trying to be... cogs in a big machine that processes the wealth of the planet to benefit ultimately a few. It's nature giving us a powerful signal that something is wrong, but we have legions of shrinks and drug perveyors to convince you the YOU need to work on YOURself , they charge you their fees, listen to you , give you pills and send you back to the front lines. Get real, guys... stop being sheep and refuse to be part of it anymore. Only then will anything change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Let's be real here... Posted by: Cathyc
Pseudo-Scientific Jargon
Posted by: LeaderofMen on Nov 14, 2007 11:30 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pharmas simply do advertising.

They rely on an age-old technique called 'pseudo-scientific jargon'. They MAKE you think you have a disease that you do not have.

If you buy in to any advertising on TV you are a MORON. Sorry, I learned this in 9th grade. I was a freshman in high school when we were expressly taught about this technique and other advertising techniques to foist products onto people.

I guess they don't teach this anymore.

And that was in a PUBLIC SCHOOL.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

NAMI... hmmmmm
Posted by: DaBear on Nov 14, 2007 12:00 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
NAMI is an interesting animal. This was the most intriguing part of this very problematic and disturbing article. Most commentors noticed the hazy writing and the meandering premise, and I too am annoyed at the reckless blurring Levine makes. But the NAMI thing got me thinking.

Our own experience with NAMI is that, at least on the local county level, they're a bunch of do-gooders who try hard but their model is a bit "off." They are really into pushing legislation that, among other things, helps the family of patients force the patient into treatment or onto meds. When we tried to get NAMI to advocate for anti-discriminatory legislation we got cold shouldered. They supported and thought the world of the local sheriff unit that has a record of shooting suicidal people (ironically who get suicidal on their meds like Zoloft and Depakote, yipe! I remember that ride...). They seem to be really invested in seeing the attention-different (usually bi-polar) person from the "illness" or "problem" model rather than an "adaptive-gene" model. Now I wonder if it's the Ely-Lilly connection driving that. Either that or do-gooding isn't suffiecient a basis for advocacy for people who are wired differently.

In any case, the problem model has a very limited use, even though it makes parents and siblings initially feel supported. The only people I know who have been successful in coping with mental illness (patients and their families alike) and leading very full, albeit highly energetic and "interresting" lives have been those that have chosen to use an adaptive-gene or wired-different model.

In that model a person with BP or Schizphrenia or ADHD, Tourettes, Autism, just is the way they are, not "bad" but "different." Meds are employed to allow the "patient" to adapt to their natural wiring and avoid the destructive elements of their wiring such as not having to resort to the ultimate pain relief (suicide). There's an emphasis on the gift that wiring brings--like Thom Hatman's Hunter notion for ADD/HD, George Lyn's Fearless Explorer for TS, Magician for Autism, Warrior for BP. It's not that there aren't problems that come up in that model... just ask anyone who's had to watch a sibling ride a roller coaster of a BP rapid cycle with 3 days of deep depression where they can't even brush their teeth or open their eyes followed by 2 days of playing chicken in urban bus traffic. On meds that may be reduced but that cycle is still there (it might be 3 days of cranky negativity or "moodiness" followed by 2 days of blissful optimism, but it's still a cycle and it's visible). If you over medicate that sibling can end up flat and numb, the dull vacant look in their eyes makes you want to weep because you feel happy not to have to ride the crazy coaster or the moody with them but look at them, they're not themselves, their chemically flattened. The adaptive model isn't a panecea and it doesn't alter the reality of someone's very different wiring from what society deems "normal." But it's a hell of a lot more effective than seeing the wired-different person as a problem to be drugged into submission and flattened into sub-humanness, caged up and shot at by paramilitarized cops fresh from Baghdad or Kabul, deprived of housing because NAMI wanted the distraught family not the patient to have the final word over whether a person has civil and human rights or not due to their mental state. The problem model families seem to suffer a hell of a lot more and often they're fighting over and with meds and cops constantly.

At the same time, NAMI is pretty much the only group out there with a presence. We went through several of their free training workshops but frankly, their "services" weren't supportive and weren't all that helpful. Wailing about more drugs and cops to "handle" patients just doesn't seem like it's a good idea to us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm not so sure all antidepressants are bad.
Posted by: cjohnson44 on Nov 14, 2007 12:04 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Take me, for example. Since I went on Lexapro, I dumped my manipulative user girlfriend, told my power-tripping boss to stick it up his ass, and cut out all the tedious bores who were using me as their sounding board and wasting my time. Now, I've never been happier!

Sure, a lot of these drugs are overused; but when necessary, they work wonders.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» As if --- Posted by: Cathyc
Campaign for the Mind of America
Posted by: Cathyc on Nov 14, 2007 12:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If all else fails (all these dirty tricks, that is) then there's always the tanks and guns to keep the "Mind of America" under (their) control, right!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» It must be MAGIC being you ... Posted by: BenCaxton12
What Should Have Been Said
Posted by: sofla100 on Nov 14, 2007 12:36 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a poorly written article that misses what are really the important points:

1. Counseling and therapy are being sidetracked and not being used often enough, or at least not being used in conjunction with medication. Most of the reason is economic, because insurance companies find paying for the pills to be cheaper than the therapy.

2. The mental health field is subject to changing definitions for observed conditions, no question about it. For example, the rapid rise in what is now diagnosed as autism. A decade back many of these same individuals would have been diagnosed with developmental delays. You have some of this also operating with the so-called borderline personality disorder, depression versus manic-depression and "adjustment disorders," etc.

3. Changing definitions of diagnoses does not however, negate that the best way to help people is often really a combination of counseling and medication. I wish the author of this article had said this. Where things go wrong is that some people may not need to be indefinetly on meds, although some might, but others will not.

4. Big Pharma is a problem, yes indeed. But, this has to do with the fact that they are going to keep changing the molecular structure of psych drugs just a tiny bit so they can patent the change and then market the drug. This is big money at work. Psychiatrists just need to look, however, at if "cheaper" drugs will do the same thing, perhaps are even better. And, use generics where available.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Thanks for sensibility Posted by: mcartri
Prescription for Disaster
Posted by: jbur816 on Nov 14, 2007 1:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
on google video. More in-depth coverage of this same topic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

whom the gods choose to rule, they first make mad
Posted by: pikaomega on Nov 14, 2007 1:10 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From birth, I have dealt with the effects of Bi-Polar Disorder, and I feel the need to outline the course and the costs that this disease can inflict.

As an infant, my circadian rythym ran anywhere from 18-24 hours for days on end, followed by what my mother called a "sleepy day", which meant roughly 24 hours of sleep. As I got older, my depressive episodes led to, and I mean this literally, 11 months spent in my bedroom in solitude, emerging to use the restroom and make meals, which I immediately took back to my bunker. This period was marked with the occasional mania, where I would do things such as wake my younger brothers up in the middle of the night to play outside. Regardless of which end of the spectrum I was on at any given moment, sleep was difficult to come by, and I rarely dozed off before 2 am, only to be woken at 6 am to catch the school bus.

At 17, I had my first nervous breakdown. In bed for a month and a half, I was physically dragged to a doctor, I was diagnosed with Bi-Polar I Disorder, defined as the more extreme of the two, exhibiting rapid mood swings and possible psychotic episodes. My poor attendance prevented my graduating from high school, regardless of the fact that when I returned to class after two months, I was averaging an A- in all classes.

I learned to deal with the days without sleep, the inability to hold a coherent thought, the listlessness that became my life. Where depression was the norm in my younger days, as I got older, mania became the standard. My sleeplessness would average 2-3 days, at my most level moments. After my grandfather, with whom I shared a bond that words cannot do justice, passed away in 2003, I was engulfed by an indescribable, horrific wave of mania. This began as 3-4 days proceeded by 6 hours of sleep...then 5-6 days with about 3 hours of sleep...then 8-9 days, nodding of for 15 minutes at a time every once in a while. This manic episode spanned 4 1/2 months; I could not talk, I wandered in circles around my house, not knowing where I was. After a suicide attempt, I was admitted to a psychatric ward-10 days without sleep. Here I had a psychotic breakdown, was strapped to a gurney and injected with a massive dose of Adavan. And I slept.

I had been given medication, but like so many people who have this, I felt better and stopped taking my meds. On Mother's Day of 2005, ironically enough, my mom and brother rushed to my apartment to find me sobbing uncontrollably. I slipped here and never came back. Three days after Christmas, I was re-admitted to the psych ward.

I am lucky. I have a wonderful resident doctor (which means that I can afford the otherwise impossible $12 monthly fee and get sample medication), am on a regiment of meds that works and am fairly stable. Still, I have upswings, where my brain feels like I am being electrocuted. I never know when this will happen, and I am aware that odds are someday I will slip off of the edge again.

People need to realize that this is a physical disorder. It is no different or less serious than something that shows up on a lab test or an x-ray. We need mental health parity in our healthcare system. We need understanding from other people that this is serious and life threatening. My mother has repeatedly had my landlords unlock my door to make sure that I am still alive. My brother was amazed when I turned 26 last year, because he was sure that I would have been gone by then. This is a situation that not only tears apart the lives of we who experience it, but makes our loved ones hurt with us, knowing that we exist in torment and that they can only stand by, watch, and wait for the day when it finally claims us.

I apologize for the length of this comment, but I can only hope that my experience can show others that there is hope, and that understanding and support is crucial to its management.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Insensitive or a snark? Posted by: mcartri
Pharmaceutical business model: Marketing deceit.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Nov 14, 2007 2:35 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fact one is that major pharmaceutical profits are based on patented drugs, period. Costs of production are usually far, far lower than the cost of the patented product. The phrase "recouping research costs" comes tripping out of the lips of pharma CEOs at this point, but the fact is that most of the research these days is done at universities using public funds under 'partnerships" with industry (partnerships that assign control of all patents to the pharma corporations).

Fact two is that established drugs or no drugs at all are generally safer than the "hot new product" which was usually cooked up in order to have a patented replacement. If a drug has been in use for 30 years, there's a better chance that doctors will have discovered any problems with it (take for example Vioxx and Celebrex, celebrated pain drugs that also caused heart damage - cannabis sativa-sourced THC would have been a safer choice for those patients).

Fact 3 is that the basis of the pharmaceutical business is not R&D, but rather sales and marketing. That's the heart of the pharmaceutical business - take whatever crappy drug you've got the patent to and pump it up using every available avenue. A great example of how that works is Tamiflu - the patent is owned by Donald Rumsfeld's old company, Gilead Biosciences, and the U.S. government acted as their Tamiflu marketing assistant - G.W. Bush held huge news conferences on the "Avian Flu Threat" and Gilead made millions off of Tamiflu sales - a drug which, incidentally, will provide little if any protection against a flu outbreak, and which also has nasty side effects.

The bottom line is that the patient is now viewed by the vast majority of the corporate medical system as just another consumer. The more drugs you can stuff into the consumer, and the more the consumer pays for each drug, the better off the pharmaceutical industry is. It doesn't really matter who pays for the drug - the government, the health care insurer - as long as the cash keeps flowing in. That's the essence of the drug business for you - it's all about control of intellectual property, huge marketing campaigns, and keeping quiet about the ridiculously low cost of drug synthesis.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Scientology on Alternet! Why am I not surprised?
Posted by: Angry and Black on Nov 14, 2007 2:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What gives?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: