www.antipsychiatry.org
PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS:
Cure or Quackery?
by Lawrence Stevens, J.D.Psychiatric drugs are worthless, and most of them are harmful. Many cause permanent brain damage at the doses customarily given. Psychiatric drugs and the profession that promotes them are dangers to your health.
ANTIDEPRESSANTS
The Comprehensive Textbook of
Psychiatry/IV, published in 1985, says "The
tricyclic-type drugs are the most effective class of
anti-depressants" (Williams & Wilkins, p. 1520).
But in his book Overcoming Depression, published in
1981, Dr. Andrew Stanway, a British physician, says "If
anti-depressant drugs were really as effective as they are made
out to be, surely hospital admission rates for depression would
have fallen over the twenty years they've been available.
Alas, this has not happened. ... Many trials have found
that tricyclics are only marginally more effective than placebos,
and some have even found that they are not as effective as dummy
tablets" (Hamlyn Publishing Group, Ltd., p. 159-160).
In his textbook Electroconvulsive Therapy, Richard
Abrams, M.D., Professor of Psychiatry at Chicago Medical School,
explains the reason for the 1988 edition of his book updating
the edition published 6 years earlier: "During these six
years interest in ECT has bourgeoned. ... What is responsible for
this volte-face in American psychiatry?
Disenchantment with the antidepressants, perhaps. None has
been found that is therapeutically superior to
imipramine [a tricyclic], now over 30 years old, and the more
recently introduced compounds are often either less effective or
more toxic than the older drugs, or both" (Oxford Univ.
Press, p. xi). In this book, Dr. Abrams says "despite
manufacturers' claims, no significant progress in the
pharmacological treatment of depression has occurred since the
introduction of imipramine in 1958" (p. 7). In the
Foreword to this book, Max Fink, M.D., a psychiatry professor at
the State University of New York at Stony Brook, says the reason
for increased use of electroconvulsive "therapy" (ECT)
as a treatment for depression is what he calls
"Disappointment with the efficacy of psychotropic
drugs" (p. vii). In his book Psychiatric Drugs:
Hazards to the Brain, published in 1983, psychiatrist Peter
Breggin, M.D., asserts: "The most fundamental point to be
made about the most frequently used major antidepressants is
that they have no specifically antidepressant effect.
Like
the major tranquilizers to which they are so closely related,
they are highly neurotoxic and brain disabling, and achieve
their impact through the disruption of normal brain function.
... Only the `clinical opinion' of drug advocates supports
any antidepressant effect" of so-called antidepressant
drugs (Springer Pub. Co., pp. 160 & 184). An article
in the February 7, 1994 Newsweek magazine says that
"Prozac...and its chemical cousins Zoloft and Paxil are no
more effective than older treatments for depression" (p.
41). Most of the people I have talked to who have taken
so-called antidepressants, including Prozac, say the drug didn't
work for them. This casts doubt on the often made claim
that 60% or more of the people who take supposedly
antidepressant drugs benefit from them.
LITHIUM
Lithium is said to be helpful for people whose mood repeatedly
changes from joyful to despondent and back again.
Psychiatrists call this manic-depressive disorder or
bipolar mood disorder. Lithium was first described as a
psychiatric drug in 1949 by an Australian psychiatrist, John
Cade. According to a psychiatric textbook: "While
conducting animal experiments, Cade had somewhat incidentally
noted that lithium made the animals lethargic, thus prompting
him to administer this drug to several agitated psychiatric
patients." The textbook describes this as "a
pivotal moment in the history of psychopharmacology" (Harold
I. Kaplan, M.D. & Benjamin J. Sadock, M.D., Clinical
Psychiatry, Williams & Wilkins, 1988, p. 342).
However, if you don't want to be lethargic, taking lithium
would seem to be of dubious benefit. A supporter of
lithium as psychiatric therapy admits lithium causes "a
mildly depressed, generally lethargic feeling". He
calls it "the standard lethargy" caused by lithium
(Roger Williams, "A Hasty Decision? Coping in the Aftermath
of a Manic-Depressive Episode", American Health
magazine, October 1991, p. 20). Similarly, one of my
relatives was diagnosed as manic-depressive and was given a
prescription for lithium carbonate. He told me, years
later, "Lithium insulated me from the highs but not from
the lows." It should be no surprise a
lethargy-inducing drug like lithium would have this
effect. Amazingly, psychiatrists sometimes claim lithium
wards off
feelings of depression even though, if anything,
lethargy-inducing drugs like lithium (like most psychiatric
drugs) promote feelings of despondency and unhappiness -
even if they are called antidepressants.
MINOR TRANQUILIZER/ANTI-ANXIETY DRUGS
Among the most widely used
psychiatric drugs are the ones called minor tranquilizers,
including Valium, Librium, Xanax, and Halcion. Doctors who
prescribe them say they have calming, anti-anxiety,
panic-suppressing effects or are useful as sleeping pills.
Anyone who believes these claims should go to the nearest
library and read the article "High Anxiety" in the
January 1993 Consumer Reports magazine, or read Chapter
11 in Toxic Psychiatry (St. Martin's Press, 1991), by
psychiatrist Peter Breggin, both of which allege the opposite is
closer to the truth. Like all or almost all psychiatric
drugs, the so-called minor tranquilizers don't cure anything but
are merely brain-disabling drugs. In one clinical trial,
70 percent of persons taking Halcion "developed memory
loss, depression and paranoia" ("Halcion manufacturer
Upjohn Co. defends controversial sleeping drug", Miami
Herald, December 17, 1991, p. 13A). According to the
February 17, 1992 Newsweek, "Four countries have
banned the drug outright" (p. 58). In his book Toxic
Psychiatry, psychiatrist Peter Breggin, speaking of the minor
tranquilizers, says "As with most psychiatric drugs, the
use of the medication eventually causes an increase of the very
symptoms that the drug is supposed to ameliorate" (ibid, p.
246).
PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS versus SLEEP: SLEEP DISTINGUISHED FROM
DRUG-INDUCED UNCONSCIOUSNESS
Contrary to the claim major
and
minor tranquilizers and so-called antidepressants are useful as
sleeping pills, their real effect is to inhibit or block real
sleep. When I sat in on a psychiatry class with a
medical student friend, the professor told us "Research has
shown we do not need to sleep, but we do need to
dream." The dream phase of sleep is the critical
part. Most
psychiatric drugs, including those promoted as sleeping
medications or tranquilizers, inhibit this critical dream-phase
of sleep, inducing a state that looks like sleep but actually is
a dreamless unconscious state - not sleep. Sleep, in other
words, is an important mental activity
that is impaired or stopped by most psychiatric drugs. A
self-help magazine advises: "Do not take sleeping pills
unless under doctor's orders, and then for no more than 10
consecutive nights. Besides losing their effectiveness and
becoming addictive, sleep-inducing medications reduce or prevent
the dream-stage of sleep necessary for mental health"
(Going Bonkers? magazine, premiere issue, p. 75). In The
Brain Book, University of Rhode Island professor Peter
Russell, Ph.D., says "During sleep, particularly during
dreaming periods, proteins and other chemicals in the brain used
up during the day are replenished" (Plume, 1979, p.
76). Sleep deprivation experiments on normal people show
loss
of sleep causes hallucinations if continued long enough (Maya
Pines, The Brain Changers, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,
1973, p. 105). So what would seem to be the consequences
of taking drugs that inhibit or block real sleep?
MAJOR TRANQUILIZER/NERUOLEPTIC/ANTI-PSYCHOTIC/
ANTI-SCHIZOPHRENIC DRUGS
Even as harmful as psychiatry's (so-called) antidepressants and
lithium and (so-called) antianxiety agents (or minor
tranquilizers) are, they are nowhere near as damaging as the
so-called major tranquilizers, sometimes also called
"antipsychotic" or "antischizophrenic" or
"neuroleptic" drugs. Included in this category
are Thorazine (chlorpromazine), Mellaril, Prolixin 
(fluphenazine), Compazine, Stelazine, and Haldol (haloperidol) -
and many others. In terms of their psychological effects,
these so-called major tranquilizers cause misery - not
tranquility. They physically, neurologically blot out most
of a person's ability to think and act, even at commonly given
doses. By disabling people, they can stop almost any
thinking or behavior the "therapist" wants to
stop. But this is simply disabling people, not
therapy. The drug temporarily disables or permanently
destroys good
aspects of a person's personality as much as bad. Whether
and to what extent the disability imposed by the drug can be
removed by discontinuing the drug depends on how long the drug is
given and at how great a dose. The so-called major
tranquilizer/ antipsychotic/neuroleptic drugs damage the brain
more clearly, severely, and permanently than any others used in
psychiatry. Joyce G. Small, M.D., and Iver F. Small, M.D., both
Professors of Psychiatry at Indiana University, criticize
psychiatrists who use "psychoactive medications that are
known to have neurotoxic effects", and speak of "the
increasing recognition of long-lasting and sometimes irreversible
impairments in brain function induced by neuroleptic
drugs. In this instance the evidence of brain damage is
not
subtle, but is grossly obvious even to the casual
observer!" (Behavioral and Brain Sciences, March
1984, Vol. 7, p. 34). According to Conrad M. Swartz,
Ph.D., M.D., Professor of Psychiatry at Chicago Medical School,
"While neuroleptics relieve psychotic anxiety, their
tranquilization blunts fine details of personality, including
initiative, emotional reactivity, enthusiasm, sexiness,
alertness, and insight. ... This is in addition to side
effects, usually involuntary movements which can be permanent
and are hence evidence of brain damage" (Behavioral and
Brain Sciences, March 1984, Vol. 7, pp. 37-38). A
report in 1985 in the Mental and Physical Disability Law
Reporter indicates courts in the United States have finally
begun to consider involuntary administration of the so-called
major tranquilizer/antipsychotic/neuroleptic drugs to involve
First Amendment rights "Because...antipsychotic drugs have
the capacity to severely and even permanently affect an
individual's ability to think and communicate"
("Involuntary medication claims go forward",
January-February 1985, p. 26 - emphasis added). In
Molecules of the Mind: The Brave New Science of Molecular
Psychology, Professor Jon Franklin observed: "This era
coincided with an increasing awareness that the neuroleptics not
only did not cure schizophrenia - they actually caused damage to
the brain. Suddenly, the psychiatrists who used them,
already like their patients on the fringes of society, were
suspected of Nazism and worse" (Dell Pub. Co., 1987, p.
103). In his book Psychiatric Drugs: Hazards to the
Brain, psychiatrist Peter Breggin, M.D., alleges that by
using drugs that cause brain damage, "Psychiatry has
unleashed an epidemic of neurological disease on the world"
one which "reaches 1 million to 2 million persons a
year" (op. cit., pp. 109 & 108). In severe cases,
brain damage from neuroleptic drugs is evidenced by abnormal body
movements called tardive dyskinesia. However, tardive
dyskinesia is only the tip of the iceberg of neuroleptic caused
brain damage. Higher mental functions are more vulnerable
and are impaired before the elementary functions of the
brain such as motor control. Psychiatry professor Richard
Abrams, M.D., has acknowledged that "Tardive dyskinesia has
now been reported to occur after only brief courses of
neuroleptic drug therapy" (in: Benjamin B. Wolman (editor),
The Therapist's Handbook: Treatment Methods of Mental
Disorders, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1976, p. 25). In
his book The New Psychiatry, published in 1985, Columbia
University psychiatry professor Jerrold S. Maxmen, M.D., alleges:
"The best way to avoid tardive dyskinesia is to avoid
antipsychotic drugs altogether. Except for treating
schizophrenia, they should never be used for more than two or
three consecutive months. What's criminal is that all too
many patients receive antipsychotics who shouldn't"
(Mentor, pp. 155-156). In fact, Dr. Maxmen doesn't go far
enough. His characterization of administration of the
so-called antipsychotic/anti-schizophrenic/major
tranquilizer/neuroleptic drugs as "criminal" is
accurate for all people, including those called
schizophrenic, even when the drugs aren't given long enough for
the resulting brain damage to show up as tardive
dyskinesia. The author of the Preface of a book by four
physicians
published in 1980, Tardive Dyskinesia: Research &
Treatment, made these remarks: "In the late 1960s I
summarized the literature on tardive dyskinesia ... The majority
of psychiatrists either ignored the existence of the problem or
made futile efforts to prove that these motor abnormalities were
clinically insignificant or unrelated to drug therapy. In
the meantime the number of patients affected by tardive
dyskinesia increased and the symptoms became worse in those
already afflicted by this condition. ... there are few
investigators or clinicians who still have doubts about the
iatrogenic [physician caused] nature of tardive dyskinesia. ...
It is evident that the more one learns about the toxic effects
of neuroleptics on the central nervous system, the more one sees
an urgent need to modify our current practices of drug
use.
It is unfortunate that many practitioners continue to
prescribe psychotropics in excessive amounts, and that a
considerable number of mental institutions have not yet developed
a policy regarding the management and prevention of tardive
dyskinesia. If this book, which reflects the opinions of
the experts in this field, can make a dent in the complacency of
many psychiatrists, it will be no small accomplishment" (in:
William E. Fann, M.D., et al., Tardive Dyskinesia: Research
& Treatment, SP Medical & Scientific). In
Psychiatric Drugs: Hazards to the Brain, psychiatrist Peter
Breggin, M.D., says this: "The major tranquilizers are
highly toxic drugs; they are poisonous to various organs of the
body. They are especially potent neurotoxins, and
frequently produce permanent damage to the brain. ... tardive
dyskinesia can develop in low-dose, short-term usage... the
dementia [loss of higher mental functions] associated with the
tardive dyskinesia is not usually reversible. ... Seldom have I
felt more saddened or more dismayed than by psychiatry's neglect
of the evidence that it is causing irreversible lobotomy
effects, psychosis, and dementia in millions of patients as a
result of treatment with the major tranquilizers"(op. cit.,
pp. 70, 107, 135, 146).
Psychiatry professor Richard
Abrams, M.D., has pointed out that "Tricyclic
Antidepressants...are minor chemical modifications of
chlorpromazine [Thorazine] and were introduced as potential
neuroleptics" (in: B. Wolman, The Therapist's
Handbook, op. cit., p. 31). In his book Psychiatric
Drugs: Hazards to the Brain, Dr. Breggin calls the so-called
antidepressants "Major Tranquilizers in Disguise" (p.
166). Psychiatrist Mark S. Gold, M.D., has said
antidepressants can cause tardive dyskinesia (The Good News
About Depression, Bantam, 1986, p. 259).
Why do the so-called patients
accept such "medication"? Sometimes they do so out of
ignorance about the neurological damage to which they are
subjecting themselves by following their psychiatrist's advice
to take the "medication". But much if not most
of the time, neuroleptic drugs are literally forced into
the bodies of the "patients" against their
wills. In his book Psychiatric Drugs: Hazards to the
Brain, psychiatrist Peter Breggin, M.D., says "Time and
again in my clinical experience I have witnessed patients driven
to extreme anguish and outrage by having major tranquilizers
forced on them. ... The problem is so great in routine hospital
practice that a large percentage of patients have to be
threatened with forced intramuscular injection before they will
take the drugs" (p. 45).
FORCED PSYCHIATRIC TREATMENT COMPARED WITH RAPE
Forced
administration of a psychiatric drug (or a so-called treatment
like electroshock) is a kind of tyranny that can be compared,
physically and morally, with rape. Compare sexual rape and
involuntarily administration of a psychiatric drug injected
intramuscularly into the buttocks, which is the part of the
anatomy where the injection usually is given: In both sexual rape and involuntary administration of a psychiatric drug, force is
used. In both cases, the victim's pants are pulled down.
In both cases, a tube is inserted into the victim's body
against her (or his) will. In the case of sexual rape, the
tube is a penis. In the case of what could be called
psychiatric rape, the tube is a hypodermic needle. In both
cases, a fluid is injected into the victim's body against her or
his will. In both cases it is in (or near) the
derriere. In the case of sexual rape the fluid is
semen. In
the case of psychiatric rape, the fluid is Thorazine, Prolixin
or some other brain-disabling drug. The fact of bodily
invasion is similar in both cases if not (for reasons I'll
explain) actually worse in the case of psychiatric rape. So
is the sense of outrage in the mind of the victim of each type
of assault. As psychiatry professor Thomas Szasz once
said, "violence is violence, regardless of whether it is
called psychiatric illness or psychiatric treatment."
Some who are not "hospitalized" (that is,
imprisoned) are forced to report to a doctor's office for
injections of a long-acting neuroleptic like Prolixin every two
weeks by the threat of imprisonment ("hospitalization")
and forced injection of the drug if they don't comply.
Why is psychiatric rape worse than sexual rape? As brain surgeon I. S. Cooper, M.D., said in his autobiography: "It is your brain that sees, feels, thinks, commands, responds. You are your brain. It is you. Transplanted into another carrier, another body, your brain would supply it with your memories, your thoughts, your emotions. It would still be you. The new body would be your container. It would carry you around. Your brain is you" (The Vital Probe: My Life as a Brain Surgeon, W.W.Norton & Co., 1982, p. 50-emphasis in original). The most essential and most intimate part of you is not what is between your legs but what is between your ears. An assault on a person's brain such as involuntary administration of a brain-disabling or brain-damaging "treatment" (such as a psychoactive drug or electroshock or psychosurgery) is a more intimate and morally speaking more horrible crime than sexual rape. Psychiatric rape is in moral terms a worse crime than sexual rape for another reason, also: The involuntary administration of psychiatry's biological "therapies" cause permanent impairment of brain function. In contrast, women usually are still fully sexually functional after being sexually raped. They suffer psychological harm, but so do the victims of psychiatric assault. I hope I will not be understood as belittling the trauma or wrongness of sexual rape if I point out that I have counselled sexually raped women in my law practice and that each of the half-dozen or so women I have known who have been sexually raped have gone on to have apparently normal sexual relationships, and in most cases marriages and families. In contrast, the brains of people subjected to psychiatric assault often are not as fully functional because of the physical, biological harm done by the "treatment". On a TV talk show in 1990, psychoanalyst Jeffrey Masson, Ph.D., said he hopes those responsible for such "therapies" will one day face "Nurnburg trials" (Geraldo, Nov. 30, 1990).
BRAIN-DAMAGING PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS ARE INFLICTED ON NURSING HOME
RESIDENTS
These very same brain-damaging (so-called)
neuroleptic/antipsychotic drugs are routinely administered -
involuntarily - to mentally healthy old people in nursing homes
in the United States. According to an article in the
September/October 1991 issue of In-Health magazine,
"In nursing homes, antipsychotics are used on anywhere from
21 to 44 percent of the institutionalized elderly... half of the
antipsychotics prescribed for nursing home residents could not be
explained by the diagnosis in the patient's chart.
Researchers suspect the drugs are commonly used by such 
institutions as chemical straightjackets - a means of pacifying
unruly patients" (p. 28). I know of two examples of
feeble old men in nursing homes who were barely able to get out
of their wheelchairs who were given a neuroleptic/antipsychotic
drug. One complained because he was strapped into a
wheelchair to prevent his attempts to try to walk with his
cane. The other was strapped into his bed at night to
prevent
him from getting up and falling when going to the bathroom,
necessitating defecating in his bed. Both were so
physically disabled they posed no danger to anyone. But
both dared complain bitterly about how they were
mistreated. In both cases the nursing home staffs
responded to these
complaints with injections of Haldol - mentally disabling these
men, thereby making it impossible for them to complain. The
use of these damaging drugs on nursing home residents who are not
considered to have psychiatric problems shows that their real
purpose is control, not therapy. Therapeutic claims for
neuroleptic drugs are rationalizations without factual
support.
SUPPOSEDLY "DOUBLE-BLIND" PSYCHIATRIC DRUG STUDIES
ARE BIASED
Studies indicating psychiatric drugs are
helpful are of dubious credibility because of professional
bias. All or almost all psychiatric drugs are neurotoxic
and for
this reason cause symptoms and problems such as dry mouth,
blurred vision, lightheadedness, dizziness, lethargy, difficulty
thinking, menstrual irregularities, urinary retention, heart
palpitations, and other consequences of neurological
dysfunction. Psychiatrists deceptively call these
"side-effects", even though they are the only real
effects of today's psychiatric drugs. Placebos (or sugar
pills) don't cause these problems. Since these symptoms
(or their absence) are obvious to psychiatrists evaluating
psychiatric drugs in supposedly double-blind drug trials, the
drug trials aren't really double-blind, making it impossible to
evaluate psychiatric drugs impartially. This allows
professional bias to skew the results.
MODES OF ACTION: UNKNOWN
Despite various unverified theories and claims,
psychiatrists don't know how the drugs they use work
biologically. In the words of Columbia University
psychiatry professor Jerrold S. Maxmen, M.D.: "How
psychotropic drugs work is not clear" (The New
Psychiatry, Mentor, 1985, p. 143). Experience has shown
that the effect of all of today's commonly used psychiatric
drugs is to disable the brain in a generalized way.
None of today's psychiatric drugs have the specificity
(e.g., for depression or anxiety or psychosis) that is often
claimed for them.
LIKE TAKING INSULIN FOR DIABETES?
It is often asserted that taking a psychiatric drug is like
taking insulin for diabetes. Although psychiatric drugs are
taken continuously, as is insulin - it's an absurd analogy.
Diabetes is a disease with a known physical cause. No
physical cause has been found for any of today's so-called
mental illnesses. The mode of action of insulin is known:
It is a hormone that instructs or causes cells to uptake dietary
glucose (sugar). In contrast, the modes of action of
psychiatry's drugs are unknown - although advocates of
psychiatric drugs as well as critics theorize they prevent
normal brain functioning by blocking neuroreceptors in the
brain. If this theory is correct it is another contrast
between
taking insulin and taking a psychiatric drug: Insulin
restores a normal biological function, namely, normal
glucose (or sugar) metabolism. Psychiatric drugs
interfere with a normal biological function, namely, normal
neuroreceptor functioning. Insulin is a hormone that is
found naturally in the body. Psychiatry's drugs are not
normally found in the body. Insulin gives a diabetic's body a
capability it would not have in the absence of insulin, namely,
the ability to metabolize dietary sugar normally.
Psychiatric drugs have an opposite kind of effect: They
take away (mental) capabilities the person would have in the
absence of the drug. Insulin affects the body rather than
mind. Psychiatric drugs disable the brain and hence the
mind, the mind being the essence of the real self.
THE AUTHOR, Lawrence Stevens, is a lawyer whose practice has
included representing psychiatric "patients". His
pamphlets are not copyrighted. You are invited to make copies
for distribution to those who you think will benefit.
DOWNLOAD AS PAMPHLET -
Click on this link to download a file from which you can print a copy of this article, "Psychiatric Drugs: Cure or Quackery?," in pamphlet form. You will need 8½ by 14 inch paper, a printer capable of Hewlett-Packard Laserjet (PCL 5) emulation, and Corel WordPerfect for Microsoft Windows 95/98. Printer capable of duplexing (i.e., double-sided printing) is recommended. See printing instructions. Most
Kinko's Copy shops in the USA and Canada have the needed hardware
and software, often including a duplexing printer, to download
and print pamphlets from this website.
1997 UPDATE:
The following is an excerpt from "What is Schizophrenia?" by William C. Wirshing, M.D.:
... 3. Coincident with this observed antipsychotic effect [of Thorazine] was a curious neurotoxicity clinically indistinguishable from idiopathic Parkinson’s disease. They [the drug's discoverers and developers] were, in fact, so impressed with this correlation that they suggested to their colleagues that patients be dosed to this 'neuroleptic threshold.' Thus, toxicity fell into a lockstep with efficacy in the minds of all clinicians and basic researchers who dealt with these molecules. The task that then fell to the basic researchers and the medicinal chemists was, 'How does Thorazine work?' The short answer to this question is that, even after a half century of toil, medical science is still not quite sure. ... Unfortunately, even in 1997, there is no way to screen a drug preclinically (i.e., in animal or other nonhuman models) for antischizophrenic potency. It appears that the liability to get schizophrenia is uniquely human. The liability, however, to manifest parkinsonism, on the other hand, is shared by many mammalian species. Therefore, if the original clinical observation linking neurotoxicity (the parkinsonism) and antipsychotic efficacy was correct, then all one had to do is search for a molecule that induced neurotoxicity in animals. When given to humans, this would not only induce the neurotoxicity but would result in antipsychotic efficacy. And this is what was done, over and over again-nearly 250 molecules have been elaborated in roughly this fashion during the last half century. Said another way, these drugs were discovered and developed because they produce neurotoxicity in animals. This, therefore, is their primary effect. Clinicians exploit the fortuitous co-occurrence of the side effect of antipsychotic potency. It should be no surprise then that all available "conventional" antipsychotic cornpounds produce neurotoxicity - this is what they were designed to do. ... 1) All conventional antipsychotic medications not only shared antipsychotic potential, they also shared neurotoxic liabilities - they are called, after all, 'neuroleptics,' which roughly translates as 'neurotoxic.' ... So then, how does clozapine work? Again, no one knows the answer. [emphasis added]The author, Willian C. Wirshing, M.D., is an associate professor of psychiatry at UCLA Medical School and director of the Movement Disorders Laboratory at the Brentwood VA Medical Center as well as a member of The JOURNAL Advisory Board and its medical editor.
1998 UPDATE:
The following statements are made by Michael J. Murphy, M.D.,
M.P.H., Clinical Fellow in Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School;
Ronald L. Cowan, M.D., Ph.D., Clinical Fellow in Psychiatry,
Harvard Medical School; and Lloyd I. Sederer, M.D., Associate
Professor of Clinical Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, in
their textbook Blueprints in Psychiatry (Blackwell
Science, Inc., Malden, Massachusetts, 1998):
Lithium:
"The mechanism of action of lithium in the treatment of mania is
not well determined." (p. 57)
Valproate:
"The mechanism of action of valproate is likely to be its
augmentation of GABA function in the CNS [central nervous
system]." (p. 58 - underline added)
Carbamazepine:
"The mechanism of action of carbamazepine in bipolar illness is
unknown." (p. 59)
Antidepressants:
"Antidepressants are thought to exert their effects at
particular subsets of neuronal synapses throughout the brain. ...
SSRIs [e.g., Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft] act by binding to presynaptic
serotonin reuptake proteins
... TCAs [TriCyclic Antidepressants] act by
blocking presynaptic reuptake of
both serotonin and norepinephrine. MAOIs [Mono
Amine Oxidase
Inhibitors] act by inhibiting the presynaptic enzyme
(monoamine
oxidase) ... These immediate mechanisms of action are not
sufficient to explain the delayed antidepressant effects
(typically 2 to 4 weeks). Other unknown mechanisms must
play a role in the successful psychopharmacologic treatment of
depression. ... all antidepressants have roughly the same
efficacy in treating depression ... [Only] approximately 50% of
patients who meet DSM-IV criteria for major depression will
recover with a single adequate trial (at least 6 weeks at a
therapeutic dosage) of an antidepressant." (p. 54 - underline
added)
Comment by web-master Douglas Smith:
Of course, about half of all despondent or "depressed" people
will feel significantly better in 6 weeks without "medication,"
too. What psychiatrists call "other unknown mechanisms" is
just the passage of time.
1999 UPDATES
See quotations in book review of Your Drug May Be Your Problem by Peter R. Breggin, M.D., and David Cohen, Ph.D., published in 1999.
No Prescription for Happiness: Could it be that antidepressants do little more than placebos?" by Thomas J. Moore, author of Prescription for Disaster, Boston Globe, October 17, 1999.
2000 UPDATES
There is now evidence SSRI (Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor) antidepressants such as Prozac, Paxil, and Zoloft cause brain damage: In his book Prozac Backlash, published in 2000, Joseph Glenmullen, M.D., clinical instructor in psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, says: "In recent years, the danger of long-term side effects has emerged in association with Prozac-type drugs, making it imperative to minimize one's exposure to them. Neurological disorders including disfiguring facial and whole body tics, indicating potential brain damage, are an increasing concern with patients on the drugs. ... With related drugs targeting serotonin, there is evidence that they may effect a 'chemical lobotomy' by destroying the nerve endings that they target in the brain" (p. 8). He compares brain damage that seems to be caused by SSRI antidepressants (including but not limited to Prozac, Paxil, and Zoloft) to that caused by neuroleptic/major tranquilizer drugs like Thorazine, Prolixin, and Haldol. He presents evidence that the so-called selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are not selective for serotonin but affect other chemicals in the brain, including dopamine. For more information about the book, including excerpts, see the Barnes & Noble and Amazon.com websites.
"Most important, the myth of 'accurate diagnosis' severely narrows treatment options for many psychiatric problems and has contributed to the excessive use of medication prevalent in our country today." Edward Drummond, M.D., Associate Medical Director at Seacoast Mental Health Center in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, in his book The Complete Guide to Psychiatric Drugs (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 2000), page 6. Dr. Drummond graduated from Tufts University School of Medicine and was trained in psychiatry at Harvard University.
"Nothing has harmed the quality of individual life in modern society more than the misbegotten belief that human suffering is driven by biological and genetic causes and can be rectified by taking drugs or undergoing electroshock therapy. ... If I wanted to ruin someone's life, I would convince the person that that biological psychiatry is right - that relationships mean nothing, that choice is impossible, and that the mechanics of a broken brain reign over our emotions and conduct. If I wanted to impair an individual's capacity to create empathetic, loving relationships, I would prescribe psychiatric drugs, all of which blunt our highest psychological and spiritual functions." Peter R. Breggin, M.D., in the Foreward to Reality Therapy in Action by William Glasser, M.D. (Harper Collins, 2000), p. xi (underline added).
"All psychiatric drugs produce severe biochemical imbalances and related abnormalities by interfering with the normal brain function." Peter R. Breggin, M.D., in his book Reclaiming Our Children (Perseus Books, Cambridge, Mass., 2000), page 140.
"That of course sounds ridiculous. Yet in ways small and large this is happening throughout the nation. Millions of children are desperately signaling distress and doctors are sending them home with drugs that suppress their ability to communicate their distress."
Peter R. Breggin, M.D., in his book Reclaiming Our Children (Perseus Books, Cambridge, Mass., 2000), page 142.
2001 UPDATE
U.S. News & World Report, a news magazine, referring to St. John's Wort, an herbal preparation with supposedly anti-depressant properties, reports that "Scientists are only beginning to understand how this popular mood-elevator works in the body." Amanda Spake, U.S. News & World Report, "Natural Hazards," February 12, 2001, page 43 at 46.
2002 UPDATE
A law firm has much revealing information about harm caused by Prozac and Zoloft on its web site: http://justiceseekers.com. Click on the "Prozac/Zoloft Information" link on the left edge of the page.
Protocol for Treatment of Benzodiazephine Withdrawal - by Prof. Heather Ashton, D.M., F.R.C.P. - book by a professor at the University of Newcastle, School of Neurosciences, Division of Psychiatry, about how to stop taking Xanax, Valium, Halcion, Atavan, and similar drugs. Available for $20. For information contact benzo@egroups.com or YDay548715@aol.com or Geraldine Burns, 3 Searle Road, Boston, Massachusetts 02132.
Article critical of Prozac.
See also "Drugging Children with Ritalin to Curb Hyperactivity" - Antipsychiatry Coalition webmaster Douglas A. Smith's commentary on a Time magazine cover story titled "The Age of Ritalin"
"Neuroleptics have been found to cause a dizzying array of pathological changes in the brain." Robert Whitaker, Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill, (Perseus - Cambridge, Massachusetts 2002), p. 191