Replies

The connection between psychiatric medications and suicidal behavior has been noted numerous times in the literature, and there is a large body of anecdotal evidence in the popular media that points in that direction.

...is it a coincidence that nearly every time we hear about a school shooting or high profile suicide that these medications seem to be involved?

Let's take the last three school shootings:

In the case of the U of Illinois murderer, the story is that he stopped taking his medications. Are you suggesting that if he hadn't taken the medications to begin with, and then stopped them, that he wouldn't have become homicidal? If so, the logic escapes me.

The murder of another student by the 14-year-old in California: no prescription drugs involved.

The V-Tech murderer: not known to have taken any prescription drugs, in spite of the fact that his behavior, over the course of two years, had been so threatening that he was committed by the University administration to an institution for observation, and then released on the strength of a psychiatric evaluation that he "was no threat to others." A judge ordered him into involuntary outpatient treatment, but there is no indication that he complied, as his university health records are shielded by Federal privacy laws. That hasn't obviously stopped many people from conspiracy theories, or flat-out misstatements, that the boogeyman of big pharma is somehow responsible for his satanic behavior.

Although not mentioned, the article was probably triggered by the latest shooting, and our society's current tendency to blame everything and everyone except the person who personifies ultimate evil -- not by suicide, but by cold-blooded homicide. Perhaps if we begin to put the blame where it belongs, and accept that some people actually need to be removed from society to protect others, the discussion would be more productive.

Since pschiatric medications are prescribed for those with psychiatric problems, and since those problems are self-reported and necessarily subjective, until such time as we achieve a Vulcan mind-meld, there is no way of knowing how many of those included in the "large body of anecdotal evidence" either did not report suicidal intent and/or would have taken their own lives with or without these medications.
In the case of the U of Illinois murderer, the story is that he stopped taking his medications. Are you suggesting that if he hadn't taken the medications to begin with, and then stopped them, that he wouldn't have become homicidal? If so, the logic escapes me.

I somehow get the impression that you never worked or trained in an emergency room. Am I wrong? Since the arrival of Prozac, selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors, SSRIs, have been quite a mixed bag. Although they are much cheaper than the usual "talk" therapy from psychologists and psychiatrists, the deliberate downplaying of their adverse effects, especially becoming psychotic with serotonin syndrome after starting therapy or increasing the dose, and the reverse withdrawal phenomena with discontinuation hasn't helped the medical profession, the drug industry or managed care from the insurance industry.

Performing a rigorous epidemiologic assessment of the serotonin syndrome, however, is difficult, since more than 85 percent of physicians are unaware of the serotonin syndrome as a clinical diagnosis. ¹⁰ (pdf link to "The Serotoni Syndrome," New England Journal of Medicine, 2005, Vol. 352, No. 11, P. 1112, March 17, 2005, Reference 10: Mackay FJ, Dunn NR, Mann RD. Antidepressants and the serotonin syndrome in general practice. Br J Gen Pract 1999;49: 871-4.)

The article is a week old today. FDA is requiring this data now, possibly because Congress demanded it, IIRC. Big Pharma has been spoon feeding the FDA for decades using the rubric of proprietary information to withhold data from clinical trials that didn't show their new drugs in the best possible light to get FDA approval. It's not just SSRIs, but Vioxx, etc.