Hope for recovery with psych meds?

[ClayTheScribe]

I have major depression and have been on psych meds for the past 9 years. While I feel like each drug will help me for a time, I always seen to plateau and have to move on to something else. Effexor has been the most solid one over the past 5-6 years. Besides Effexor, I'm on Lithium, Geodon, Wellbutrin and Trazedone to help me sleep. You may ask why I'm on a mood stabilizer and an anti-psychotic, well I had a bat $hit crazy psychiatrist who was convinced I was bi-polar (I'm not, I never get the highs) and put me on them and now I'm stuck on them. Any time I try to taper off them my moods or anxiety goes off kilter or out of controls. I see a new psychiatrist this morning and I'm going to tell her I, in general, have little to no faith in ever recovering from this illness and that I believe big pharmaceutical would rather keep me a sick, long-time patient/customer then help me recover from this depression. I also want subs for these two medicines 'cause I had the side effects. I just don't know how I'm going to get through this life always needing medications to keep me from losing my mind or offing myself. That thought is depressing enough...

 

[tjo73]

In my opinion the pharmaceutical companies are trying to keep us sick, because the more prescriptions are written the richer they all get. I am lucky I have never been on medication long term due to the side effects but I now refuse meds even when I feel at my worst because I don't wish to be medicated as it doesn't cure the reason I am ill in the first place only the symptoms.
The reason that the number of prescriptions for antidepressants has risen is largely down to the drug companies that make them, but also down to the usual suspect money.
Between 1991 and 2001 the numbers of antidepressants prescriptions rose in Britain by 173% when they were seen as the magic bullet for mental health. The problem is that the drug companies tend to exagerate the effectiveness of these drugs in order to sell them( their main aim is not to help but ultimately to make money). Given that the pharmeceutical industry is the most profitable in the world that just makes my point. What these companies tend to do is not make brand new drugs but to stick as closely to exsisting drugs or drugs made by other companies as possible but which are different enough to allow them to get fresh patents. Most of the revenues of these companies(36%) are spent on marketing these drugs, such as sending reps to hospitals and clinics where they give out free branded items such as pens or mugs. They also attend large conferences where they wine and dine the doctors who are likely to prescribe to patients to encourage them to prescribe their product.
But the most worrying thing of all is that when you look at the effectiveness of these drugs you dicover that they are not as effective as they are made out to be. The drug companies don't have to show that their product is better than the exsisting ones on the market to get them licensed, just that it is safe and more effective than a placebo in two pivotal trials. The companies can do as many trials as they wish until they get the results they want and then they can discard the rest.
My other point was money, the reason that a GP or shrink is more likely to give someone antidepressants rather than send them on other therapies is that drugs are cheaper in the long run then sending people for therapy. Money sadly makes the world go round.

 

[dib4uk]

I voted for no, simply being some of the drugs that have been made/created/invented have helped individuals with certain aliments and disabilities lead a more productive life, and witha a productive life comes working and stability.

 

[propane]

I think SSRI:s and neuroleptics are dangerous drugs.
But I'm not saying they are engineered for making people more sick.
They just are based on a false theory about neurotransmitters being the cause of mental illnesses. Just remember that they have the same effects on healthy people too..