• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Antidepressants largely ineffective or even harmful for children, teens

P

PokerGuy

Lifer
According to a major study published in The Lancet last week, there is no clear indication that there is a benefit over placebo or even nothing at all from giving antidepressants to children and teens.

http://www.psychiatryadvisor.com/mo...ineffective-in-children-teens/article/502236/


The pharmy industry has dumped boatloads of money pushing medications / prescriptions as the solution of choice for all sorts of issues, but it they might do more harm than good.

Personally I don't find this surprising at all. We seem to be way to quick to want to treat every "issue" with pills. IMO it's crazy to willy nilly treat anxiety/depression/issues in children and teens with pills, their brains are still developing. I'm sure there are plenty of scenarios where that is the right answer.

Hopefully this study helps reverse the trend, but I don't think it can compete with the combination of big pharma spending and a society that wants a quick pill fix to every problem....
 
The stuff is useless, no better than a placebo even for adults in my opinion.
Wasted several years with Prozac, Paxil, and Celexa. That last one I took was Effexer XR which resulted in a near psychotic episode.

I know what finally fixed it for me. Have your vitamin D levels checked out.
 
We (US), represent around 6 percent of the worlds population, yet we consume 70 percent of all prescription drugs produced.
 
PokerGuy said:
According to a major study published in The Lancet last week, there is no clear indication that there is a benefit over placebo or even nothing at all from giving antidepressants to children and teens.
Click to expand...

Uh no. I suggest you actually read the study, because the author's conclusions are not what you are trying to state. In fact, based on their metaanalysis, they found that there is a significant benefit of usage of fluoxetine in this population, in comparison to placebo, but of course, with any metaanalysis, their conclusions have many caveats. The authors then go on to discuss the limited data behind all other drugs (fluoxetine had ten trials included, paroxetine had 5, and most of the remaining drugs had 3 or fewer studies that evaluated their efficiacy).

So as the authors state: "The findings of this comprehensive network metaanalysis provide some evidence that fluoxetine might reduce depressive symptoms in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder and the extent to which this reduction is clinically meaningful is still uncertain. Notwithstanding these caveats, fluoxetine might still be considered the best option among antidepressants when a pharmacological treatment is indicated."

So I would even suggest correcting your thread title, because it is completely misrepresenting the result of the metaanalysis.
 
Very few people are chemically imbalanced and respond well to medications. Most all cases of severe depression, personality disorders, etc. are caused by built up stress and anxiety.

"Situational Stressors" must be looked at as the cause and root of the issue. The way to fix them, very hard. But if you can remove some of them, you will see a huge leap in mental health.

Zoloft, Prozac, whatever, are pretty much useless if you still are disabled, can't work, have 3 kids to feed, and going through a divorce.
 
abj13 said:
Uh no. I suggest you actually read the study, because the author's conclusions are not what you are trying to state. In fact, based on their metaanalysis, they found that there is a significant benefit of usage of fluoxetine in this population, in comparison to placebo, but of course, with any metaanalysis, their conclusions have many caveats. The authors then go on to discuss the limited data behind all other drugs (fluoxetine had ten trials included, paroxetine had 5, and most of the remaining drugs had 3 or fewer studies that evaluated their efficiacy).

So as the authors state: "The findings of this comprehensive network metaanalysis provide some evidence that fluoxetine might reduce depressive symptoms in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder and the extent to which this reduction is clinically meaningful is still uncertain. Notwithstanding these caveats, fluoxetine might still be considered the best option among antidepressants when a pharmacological treatment is indicated."

So I would even suggest correcting your thread title, because it is completely misrepresenting the result of the metaanalysis.
Click to expand...

Cue the "Well, I'm just posting the title of the article, how can I be responsible?!" response.

...which is exactly the problem. I would wager all of TexasHiker's guns that anyone who has used that exact defense of posting a misleading title has, many times over, complained about the media misleading and blatantly misreporting events in an effort to draw click bait or sensationalize. Especially in a topic where the complainer would be more passionate.

Say, guns for instance, which we see in these threads all the time. "The media is LYING! about this gun and that gun and what this gun did! Their title doesn't reflect the content of the article, much less the unreported facts of the story!"

I wonder when ATers will collectively accept that the "He/She said it first!" defense hasn't been acceptable since they graduated from grade school? This is why we are regressing as a society, why intellectualism is so unjustly feared: critical thinking no longer has a place. Rather than work together and actively disseminate real information properly, regardless of personal bias and solely for the purpose of understanding that reporting factual information honestly is in everyone's best interest, it seems it is easier (read: lazy) to just cower and defend against such practices--even if they are honest mistakes.

I submit that anyone who complains about criticism of their posting a sensationalist piece that misrepresents its own data, be forever restricted from complaining about any media that does the exact same thing regardless of the topic.
 
Last edited:
I am going to stay away from the content of this thread. However, I do want people to be very mindful of their knowledge base and emotions when posting here. This is a very controversial topic. However, it must be pointed out that depression is the most disabling illness in the world, and that suicides among teens is increasing and has increased more than 50% in the last 20 years.

To me, it is clear that public attitudes and awareness towards these struggles is critical our ability to prevent and treat mental illness.
 
Pills are the way modern parents mold their children to be calm and quiet. Chemical restraints.

The movie THX1138 was an interesting move and you see how children are started early on drugs to keep them inline.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top