I once had surgery, and was given a prescription of Tylenol-3. After taking one dose, the feeling of euphoria had me high as a kite: I felt like I was on the ceiling. Unnerved by the experience, I stopped taking the rest of the T-3s and suffered through the pain of healing.
A week after I healed, I took one more T3 and *didn't get the same feeling at all*. That only proves that codeine gives me a high tolerance after one dose.
For my current problem with insomnia and pain, I'll stick to gabapentin and baclofen at bedtime. There is no tolerance to either medication, and the risk of addiction is low. As well, moderate exercise makes the pain go away during the day.
During the day, sitting at the computer also tends to lead to pain. Frequent breaks away from my computer lead to toleration for pain. Most of my pain is due to sitting for too long in my chair. I find that taking a break at least once an hour helps reduce the pain.
When I walk too often, my left hip and left knee will start to bother me. Though, the pain subsides after reducing how fast I walk. My left shoulder joint also bothers me. It is most likely a combination of sleep position at night that leads to pain.
Baclofen relieves pain in my shoulder, and gabapentin reduces neurological pain. I used to take cyclobenzaprine but recently decided to change my medication because its use becomes less necessary after three weeks.
An added bonus is that baclofen use may reduce addiction cravings. As well, gabapentin helps improve sleep.
Baclofen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baclofen
Baclofen Alternative to reduce addiction cravings: https://plus.google.com/+RadhaSantadharma/posts/NVd5tR9WJ2j
Cyclobenzaprine: http://www.webmd.com/drugs/2/drug-8888-8087/cyclobenzaprine-oral/cyclobenzaprine-oral/details
My blog posts on cyclobenzaprine: http://gandhara.blogspot.ca/search/label/cyclobenzaprine
Treatment Effects of Gabapentin for Primary Insomnia: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20124884
My blog posts on gabapentin: http://gandhara.blogspot.ca/search/label/gabapentin
Showing posts with label medication. Show all posts
Showing posts with label medication. Show all posts
20140618
Entheogens and Their Use in Prophethood (satire)
God chooses people to be prophets, but ignorant people call it madness only to confirm it with medication.
Instead of answering God's call, these poor individuals become the schizophrenic and the bipolar, which are only man-made labels. In the end they die before a cult can be established around them.
For this is how the modern world deals with God's chosen ones.
Even though a few people become schizophrenic, this is due to stress and the inability of the person to cope with it. However, few schizophrenics develop religious delusions, because most of them are unbelievers.
In contrast, people with bipolar personality disorder make up the bulk of people with religious delusions. This is because, contrary to schizophrenics, only their mood is affected. Were it not for the moodiness, people with bipolar might have become prophets. It depends on how well they handle stress.
However, these are but medical labels which is rejected by the religious masses due to their man-made nature.
In my opinion, a person would only become schizophrenic or bipolar when she does not heed God's calling but instead treats it as a mental condition. Indeed, the atypical antipsychotic risperidone is given to schizophrenics and bipolar people. People given it develop tolerance, and need to be weaned off it. If they don't, then schizophrenic symptoms such as anxiety, delusions, and hallucinations may develop as a result.
This is why medication should be a last resort, and any psychiatrist who insists that a patient has to take it for life is incompetent.
However, from the religious viewpoint, medication is useful only when it helps to induce visions. Therefore risperidone is almost as good as fasting, though there is anecdotal evidence for marijuana and other soft drugs. Even so, because risperidone is legal, it might be useful for the new visionary to use as would phenibut. YMMV.
Just think of risperidone as a doctor-approved entheogen that only works when you take as directed up to the recommended dosage for a few months, and later try to wean yourself off them. It is during the "cold-turkey" period that the visions may appear.
So, please give risperidone a try if you are bipolar and wish to become a God's chosen one. Otherwise, avoid the booze and pot, man.
Instead of answering God's call, these poor individuals become the schizophrenic and the bipolar, which are only man-made labels. In the end they die before a cult can be established around them.
For this is how the modern world deals with God's chosen ones.
Even though a few people become schizophrenic, this is due to stress and the inability of the person to cope with it. However, few schizophrenics develop religious delusions, because most of them are unbelievers.
In contrast, people with bipolar personality disorder make up the bulk of people with religious delusions. This is because, contrary to schizophrenics, only their mood is affected. Were it not for the moodiness, people with bipolar might have become prophets. It depends on how well they handle stress.
However, these are but medical labels which is rejected by the religious masses due to their man-made nature.
In my opinion, a person would only become schizophrenic or bipolar when she does not heed God's calling but instead treats it as a mental condition. Indeed, the atypical antipsychotic risperidone is given to schizophrenics and bipolar people. People given it develop tolerance, and need to be weaned off it. If they don't, then schizophrenic symptoms such as anxiety, delusions, and hallucinations may develop as a result.
This is why medication should be a last resort, and any psychiatrist who insists that a patient has to take it for life is incompetent.
However, from the religious viewpoint, medication is useful only when it helps to induce visions. Therefore risperidone is almost as good as fasting, though there is anecdotal evidence for marijuana and other soft drugs. Even so, because risperidone is legal, it might be useful for the new visionary to use as would phenibut. YMMV.
Just think of risperidone as a doctor-approved entheogen that only works when you take as directed up to the recommended dosage for a few months, and later try to wean yourself off them. It is during the "cold-turkey" period that the visions may appear.
So, please give risperidone a try if you are bipolar and wish to become a God's chosen one. Otherwise, avoid the booze and pot, man.
20140128
R.D. Laing and Psychosis (satire)
Laing's view on psychosis:
"Laing argued that the strange behavior and seemingly confused speech of people undergoing a psychotic episode were ultimately understandable as an attempt to communicate worries and concerns, often in situations where this was not possible or not permitted. Laing stressed the role of society, and particularly the family, in the development of madness. He argued that individuals can often be put in impossible situations, where they are unable to conform to the conflicting expectations of their peers, leading to a 'lose-lose situation' and immense mental distress for the individuals concerned. Madness was therefore an expression of this distress, and should be valued as a cathartic and transformative experience."
Fear arises and evolves into anxiety regarding a threat against the psychotic. Often psychosis begins with fears, leading to anxiety which then leads to insomnia that morphs into hypomania. When insomnia leads to mania, that often occurs due to inadequate rest, both of the body and of the mind.
Indeed, it is anxiety and possible repressed anger that precipitates insomnia which might escalate into hypomania and evolve further into psychosis. However, this is not always the case since the experienced mental health consumer learns the importance of sleep hygiene.
My counter argument to Laing is that psychosis is a resolution of the classic double-bind in a manner that is sometimes incomprehensible to society, due to conflicting desires and expectations on each of us.
In most cases, psychosis is non-violent and harmless.
Rather, it is the ignorance and fear of all involved parties including the mental health consumers and her concerned family members, friends and lovers which contributes to any co-morbidity of violence, be it harm to others or self-harm.
When psychotics do habituate towards violence due to what is dismissed as abnormal fear, that violence has been learned either from within the family environment originally or due to social interactions with the public and privately with care workers. Once learned, violence may become a co-morbid behavior associated with the psychiatric disorder of which psychosis is a symptom.
Thus it is imperative that an anxiolytic agent or physical action occurs to relive the anxiety so that any remaining fear motivates the mental health consumer in a positive and non-violent manner. This may consist of a tranquilizer or a non-violent action that relieves the anxiety.
Then the "best cure" for the psychotic is self-talk that counteracts negative self-talk, i.e. positive affirmations which calm her down, and thus removing the fear and the anxiety that it sometimes causes.
If a concerned family member or friend truly wishes to help a psychotic, then it is best to either believe in her even when her confused state of mind gives reason to fear for her grasp on reality, and to graciously remove oneself from the situation when one feels threatened.
In order to have rapport with the psychotic it is best to calmly facilitate positive non-violent confrontation, even to the point of supporting their belief in their limited world-view as delusion, with the intent of gaining compliance.
Direct confrontation with the psychotic is not often recommended since the subsequent anxiety due to negative adaptation during the resolution of the double-bind will only lead to reinforcement of the very delusion the care-giver is trying to "cure." Indeed, it is not helpful to cure the delusion of the mental health consumer while maintaining her psychosis.
Indeed, the wise care-giver should never patronize or belittle the psychotic lest it threaten their limited worldview. Instead, it is best to wait out the psychosis after treating it with a sedative when calm, non-threatening discussion with the mental health consumer fail to resolve the crisis.
Time is a better medication for most acute displays of psychosis which have little or no violent aspects.
In the case of serious (chronic) psychosis, it may be necessary to commit the psychotic to a psychiatric ward and for the use of the appropriate medication (usually atypical anti-psychotics such as seroquel or Abilify.
However, sedation resulting from anti-psychotic use may result in weight gain and its associated effect on the cardiovascular system.
Consequently, a weight-maintenance program may be useful as directed by a medical professional.
When the mental health consumer has stabilized mentally, it is necessary to provide mental health education including the use of coping strategies which relieve anxiety due to stress. Mental health professionals who omit such education by psychologists and psychotherapists merely set the stage for possible future relapse.
Indeed, psychiatric professionals and their support staff are still required to provide the minimum of self-care training of patients in their care. While sedatives might reduce symptoms of the mental health consumer, medication itself is not therapy.
In my opinion, on-line self therapy usually consists of a careful research and practice of coping strategies to reduce the impact that stress has upon the consumer.
Regarding the discussion of medication by my fellow mental health consumers, only the experienced consumer supplies correct information regarding psychotropic drugs. When a consumer's reaction to a drug appears to be clouded by their feelings about it, I usually consider it anecdotal and a possible emotional reaction rather than a physiological one.
Due to the density of emotional reaction to a particular medication, it is impossible to determine the physiological response to the drug. Therefore I tend not to value anecdotes on how the drug makes the consumer feel. Rather, it becomes more interesting to sift through the consumer anecdotes to find the rare anecdote that displays the physiological response.
I suppose this is why I would rather read the abstract about a medical trial than read discussion of medications on a mental health consumers forum. My impression of such candid on-line discussions is that most psychotropic drugs make people with a mental illness feel like crap because their mental health is compromised by seeing the glass half-empty.
Since they expect medication to dull their senses and otherwise impair their positive appreciation of life, it is no wonder that their impression of medication paints a negative picture of psychotropic medication.
Even so, I am touched by the emotional responses to medication because most mental health consumers would rather be treated as human beings. That is why the medications make them feel like crap: not one medication offers psychotherapy.
In the case of the psychotic mental health consumer, their mental health crisis requires treatment lest their psychoses threaten their safety or the safety of other people, both patients and care-givers.
I merely question the over-prescription of medication and especially the idea that a mental illness requires the long-term use of medications.
Thus it makes better sense to accept the psychotic's delusion as real until the psychotic explains her reason for creating it to not deal with the world realistically. Until then, it makes no sense to sedate the psychotic since most psychoses are harmless and resolve themselves on their own over time.
While I am not suggesting that Seroquel and Abilify are useless, I am adamant that the rights of mental health consumers be protected by informed consent when not psychotic, while obligations by mental health professionals be honored by providing psychotics with fast-acting sedatives which are not habit-forming.
Even if such a drug protocol meant the use of sedatives such as mirtazapine, then the doctor should not reject them because they are reserved for depression. Instead, the drugs used should be based on the criteria of least harm to the consumer.
As for therapy, the risk of burnout from stress has put off most psychology students from deciding to become psychotherapists. I am sure that a part of the reasoning behind this aversion to become a psychotherapist might have to do with the fear of people with mental illness and associate stigma associated with mental illness. It is rare that a psychology graduate is able to empathize with a psychiatric patient because he is apparently more mentally healthy than the patient.
However, on the average, there is actually no difference between a psychology graduate and the patient, except in degree of mental health. A dedicated psychotherapist is in service of the client seeking therapy. Any professional relationship between the client and the therapist is threatened by any overt superiority by either of them.
Thus there is need to emphasize that throughout the post-secondary education of a psychotherapist, the therapist is not the master of the client. Rather, the professional relationship between them implies equality. Without such humility, neither the patient not the therapist will benefit greatly from their relationship.
With regard to R.D. Laing and psychosis, it is important to emphasize that professional service by therapists and psychiatrists to all their patients requires that their clients understand the importance of the professional relationship that underlies therapy. This in no way is a personal relationship.
While the client may think she is under no obligation to behave professionally with her therapist or psychiatrist, it might be useful to consider this: would she think it is appropriate to expect her butcher to be at her beck and call?
Thus, it is important for mental health consumers to understand that the client is obliged to treat the therapist or psychiatrist with the respect she reserved for her favorite teacher in school, be it public or post-secondary.
I myself am thankful to my psychotherapist who provided me with welcome advice when he told me that I would never report to the Emergency ward of the local hospital if I was undergoing a psychosis. I take this to be advice that my mental health is determined by appropriate sleep hygiene and its positive effect of reducing insomnia.
To conclude this blog post I present a quote from psychiatrist Adolf Meyer to temper our reliance on medication to treat mental illness:
"Those who imagine that all psychiatry and psychopathology and therapy have to resolve themselves into a smattering of claims and hypotheses of psychoanalysis and that they stand or fall with one's feelings about psychoanalysis, are equally misguided".
Originally posted: May 5, 2005 6:03 PM PDT
References:
Adolf Meyer, psychiatrist - legacy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Meyer_%28psychiatrist%29#Legacy
"Laing argued that the strange behavior and seemingly confused speech of people undergoing a psychotic episode were ultimately understandable as an attempt to communicate worries and concerns, often in situations where this was not possible or not permitted. Laing stressed the role of society, and particularly the family, in the development of madness. He argued that individuals can often be put in impossible situations, where they are unable to conform to the conflicting expectations of their peers, leading to a 'lose-lose situation' and immense mental distress for the individuals concerned. Madness was therefore an expression of this distress, and should be valued as a cathartic and transformative experience."
Fear arises and evolves into anxiety regarding a threat against the psychotic. Often psychosis begins with fears, leading to anxiety which then leads to insomnia that morphs into hypomania. When insomnia leads to mania, that often occurs due to inadequate rest, both of the body and of the mind.
Indeed, it is anxiety and possible repressed anger that precipitates insomnia which might escalate into hypomania and evolve further into psychosis. However, this is not always the case since the experienced mental health consumer learns the importance of sleep hygiene.
My counter argument to Laing is that psychosis is a resolution of the classic double-bind in a manner that is sometimes incomprehensible to society, due to conflicting desires and expectations on each of us.
In most cases, psychosis is non-violent and harmless.
Rather, it is the ignorance and fear of all involved parties including the mental health consumers and her concerned family members, friends and lovers which contributes to any co-morbidity of violence, be it harm to others or self-harm.
When psychotics do habituate towards violence due to what is dismissed as abnormal fear, that violence has been learned either from within the family environment originally or due to social interactions with the public and privately with care workers. Once learned, violence may become a co-morbid behavior associated with the psychiatric disorder of which psychosis is a symptom.
Thus it is imperative that an anxiolytic agent or physical action occurs to relive the anxiety so that any remaining fear motivates the mental health consumer in a positive and non-violent manner. This may consist of a tranquilizer or a non-violent action that relieves the anxiety.
Then the "best cure" for the psychotic is self-talk that counteracts negative self-talk, i.e. positive affirmations which calm her down, and thus removing the fear and the anxiety that it sometimes causes.
If a concerned family member or friend truly wishes to help a psychotic, then it is best to either believe in her even when her confused state of mind gives reason to fear for her grasp on reality, and to graciously remove oneself from the situation when one feels threatened.
In order to have rapport with the psychotic it is best to calmly facilitate positive non-violent confrontation, even to the point of supporting their belief in their limited world-view as delusion, with the intent of gaining compliance.
Direct confrontation with the psychotic is not often recommended since the subsequent anxiety due to negative adaptation during the resolution of the double-bind will only lead to reinforcement of the very delusion the care-giver is trying to "cure." Indeed, it is not helpful to cure the delusion of the mental health consumer while maintaining her psychosis.
Indeed, the wise care-giver should never patronize or belittle the psychotic lest it threaten their limited worldview. Instead, it is best to wait out the psychosis after treating it with a sedative when calm, non-threatening discussion with the mental health consumer fail to resolve the crisis.
Time is a better medication for most acute displays of psychosis which have little or no violent aspects.
In the case of serious (chronic) psychosis, it may be necessary to commit the psychotic to a psychiatric ward and for the use of the appropriate medication (usually atypical anti-psychotics such as seroquel or Abilify.
However, sedation resulting from anti-psychotic use may result in weight gain and its associated effect on the cardiovascular system.
Consequently, a weight-maintenance program may be useful as directed by a medical professional.
When the mental health consumer has stabilized mentally, it is necessary to provide mental health education including the use of coping strategies which relieve anxiety due to stress. Mental health professionals who omit such education by psychologists and psychotherapists merely set the stage for possible future relapse.
Indeed, psychiatric professionals and their support staff are still required to provide the minimum of self-care training of patients in their care. While sedatives might reduce symptoms of the mental health consumer, medication itself is not therapy.
In my opinion, on-line self therapy usually consists of a careful research and practice of coping strategies to reduce the impact that stress has upon the consumer.
Regarding the discussion of medication by my fellow mental health consumers, only the experienced consumer supplies correct information regarding psychotropic drugs. When a consumer's reaction to a drug appears to be clouded by their feelings about it, I usually consider it anecdotal and a possible emotional reaction rather than a physiological one.
Due to the density of emotional reaction to a particular medication, it is impossible to determine the physiological response to the drug. Therefore I tend not to value anecdotes on how the drug makes the consumer feel. Rather, it becomes more interesting to sift through the consumer anecdotes to find the rare anecdote that displays the physiological response.
I suppose this is why I would rather read the abstract about a medical trial than read discussion of medications on a mental health consumers forum. My impression of such candid on-line discussions is that most psychotropic drugs make people with a mental illness feel like crap because their mental health is compromised by seeing the glass half-empty.
Since they expect medication to dull their senses and otherwise impair their positive appreciation of life, it is no wonder that their impression of medication paints a negative picture of psychotropic medication.
Even so, I am touched by the emotional responses to medication because most mental health consumers would rather be treated as human beings. That is why the medications make them feel like crap: not one medication offers psychotherapy.
In the case of the psychotic mental health consumer, their mental health crisis requires treatment lest their psychoses threaten their safety or the safety of other people, both patients and care-givers.
I merely question the over-prescription of medication and especially the idea that a mental illness requires the long-term use of medications.
Thus it makes better sense to accept the psychotic's delusion as real until the psychotic explains her reason for creating it to not deal with the world realistically. Until then, it makes no sense to sedate the psychotic since most psychoses are harmless and resolve themselves on their own over time.
While I am not suggesting that Seroquel and Abilify are useless, I am adamant that the rights of mental health consumers be protected by informed consent when not psychotic, while obligations by mental health professionals be honored by providing psychotics with fast-acting sedatives which are not habit-forming.
Even if such a drug protocol meant the use of sedatives such as mirtazapine, then the doctor should not reject them because they are reserved for depression. Instead, the drugs used should be based on the criteria of least harm to the consumer.
As for therapy, the risk of burnout from stress has put off most psychology students from deciding to become psychotherapists. I am sure that a part of the reasoning behind this aversion to become a psychotherapist might have to do with the fear of people with mental illness and associate stigma associated with mental illness. It is rare that a psychology graduate is able to empathize with a psychiatric patient because he is apparently more mentally healthy than the patient.
However, on the average, there is actually no difference between a psychology graduate and the patient, except in degree of mental health. A dedicated psychotherapist is in service of the client seeking therapy. Any professional relationship between the client and the therapist is threatened by any overt superiority by either of them.
Thus there is need to emphasize that throughout the post-secondary education of a psychotherapist, the therapist is not the master of the client. Rather, the professional relationship between them implies equality. Without such humility, neither the patient not the therapist will benefit greatly from their relationship.
With regard to R.D. Laing and psychosis, it is important to emphasize that professional service by therapists and psychiatrists to all their patients requires that their clients understand the importance of the professional relationship that underlies therapy. This in no way is a personal relationship.
While the client may think she is under no obligation to behave professionally with her therapist or psychiatrist, it might be useful to consider this: would she think it is appropriate to expect her butcher to be at her beck and call?
Thus, it is important for mental health consumers to understand that the client is obliged to treat the therapist or psychiatrist with the respect she reserved for her favorite teacher in school, be it public or post-secondary.
I myself am thankful to my psychotherapist who provided me with welcome advice when he told me that I would never report to the Emergency ward of the local hospital if I was undergoing a psychosis. I take this to be advice that my mental health is determined by appropriate sleep hygiene and its positive effect of reducing insomnia.
To conclude this blog post I present a quote from psychiatrist Adolf Meyer to temper our reliance on medication to treat mental illness:
"Those who imagine that all psychiatry and psychopathology and therapy have to resolve themselves into a smattering of claims and hypotheses of psychoanalysis and that they stand or fall with one's feelings about psychoanalysis, are equally misguided".
Originally posted: May 5, 2005 6:03 PM PDT
References:
Adolf Meyer, psychiatrist - legacy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Meyer_%28psychiatrist%29#Legacy
20140107
What If the Mad are Actually the Sane Ones? (satire)
What if madness is when common sense calls to us but we forgot how to listen to ourselves because our fragile connection to reality is broken temporarily?
Then medical intervention comes to the moment of psychic healing when we either remain in fear, unable to rise above madness, or we boldly go on to heal, and to become whole, using humility to reconnect to reality.
Mere mortals would confuse the mad for those people who have risen above madness, due to their fear and ignorance about madness.
What if the State assumes that madness should be controlled by medication because of that same fear?
Then these same medications are administered not only to relieve the mad of their affliction but also to relieve the fear which "normal" people feel when faced with the mad.
How absurd that we subject the mad to medication to relieve our own fears about madness itself!
Is this not the height of madness itself, that we subject others to medication to control them so that we ourselves may feel less fear towards them?
Even so, we do not take medication to relieve our own fears about madness because of the delusion that we ourselves consider ourselves sane while assuming that the mad are insane.
In doing so, we prove how insane society truly is! Perhaps then the truly mad are kept safe from society in psychiatric wards so as to be protected from society.
Then the purpose of medication is to calm extremely nervous people so that they may function in a society that has yet to overcome the stigma of mental illness.
Sometimes I ask these questions with the insight that the majority of people with mental illness are mostly non-violent people. Anyone who is violent and legally insane are excluded from this definition of sanity as madness. This is because their behavior forms part of the etiology of the psychopath.
Rather this so-called argument is satire designed to de-stigmatize mental illness.
Originally posted: May 20, 2005 08:18 PM
Then medical intervention comes to the moment of psychic healing when we either remain in fear, unable to rise above madness, or we boldly go on to heal, and to become whole, using humility to reconnect to reality.
Mere mortals would confuse the mad for those people who have risen above madness, due to their fear and ignorance about madness.
What if the State assumes that madness should be controlled by medication because of that same fear?
Then these same medications are administered not only to relieve the mad of their affliction but also to relieve the fear which "normal" people feel when faced with the mad.
How absurd that we subject the mad to medication to relieve our own fears about madness itself!
Is this not the height of madness itself, that we subject others to medication to control them so that we ourselves may feel less fear towards them?
Even so, we do not take medication to relieve our own fears about madness because of the delusion that we ourselves consider ourselves sane while assuming that the mad are insane.
In doing so, we prove how insane society truly is! Perhaps then the truly mad are kept safe from society in psychiatric wards so as to be protected from society.
Then the purpose of medication is to calm extremely nervous people so that they may function in a society that has yet to overcome the stigma of mental illness.
Sometimes I ask these questions with the insight that the majority of people with mental illness are mostly non-violent people. Anyone who is violent and legally insane are excluded from this definition of sanity as madness. This is because their behavior forms part of the etiology of the psychopath.
Rather this so-called argument is satire designed to de-stigmatize mental illness.
Originally posted: May 20, 2005 08:18 PM
20131231
On satan, meds and mental illness (satire)
According to superstitous people, satan never commands, he only suggests.
He suggests by showing tempting visions to distract the faithful, though man's thoughts are easily distracted by this images of temptation.
However, satan is no master of mind control. Only a person has control of his or her mind, but may decide at his will to place faith in a leader out of compliant need of an authority figure.
With suggestion, satan might tempt such a figure, but that person may be so egocentric that the thought of being tempted by satan never crosses his mind. Yet he is not so egocentric as to deny the existence of God, which happens when one's ego becomes so big that the shining of his imagination is mistaken for "no God but I".
Today, the modern terms for human behavior influenced by satan are "mental illness" and "the evil that men do." However, most mental illnesses have nothing to do with satan according to the biochemical model. This theoretical model denies supernatural influence on human behavior, and substitutes the biochemical "superstition" for the spiritual one.
For the biochemical model of mental illness is a superstition because much of the reasoning that explains how psychiatric medications work is theory, and often certain medications do not work as the literature says.
A famous example of this is paxil (paroxetine): Glaxo-Smith-Kline claimed that the antidepressant had few withdrawal symptoms. However, it turned out that research which indicated that test patient indeed did have problems with withdrawal from the medication was suppressed and a big court case was fought over it.
Another example is mirtazapine, which is a sedative affecting the histamine receptors. When 30+ mg of mirtazapine is administered, the anti-histamine properties lead to changes in serotonin levels which affected the adrenalin receptors, leading to changes in alertness.
Mirtazapine actually reduces the serotonin-meditated side effect of nausea, due to its anti-histamine effect. As well, it also improves access to memory, resulting in a nootropic effect. Despite the initial anti-histamine effect, the brain adapts to the changes that mirtazapine causes, resulting in changes in sleep behavior at night, leading one to wake up hungry and willing to snack.
Though, the resulting sedation caused by mirtazapine results in the ability to realize that life is go on. Then, after three months on the drug, one day it will poop out and the only thing to do at that point is taper off rather than play the frustrating game of "hoping the medication still works", which involves taking the first 15 mg dose in the morning and the last dose at bedtime.
Finally, after tapering off and enduring the mild chaos in the mind due to it, even one dose of mirtazapine has the effect of strong sedation, so strong that I wonder why I ever took it!
Overall, mirtazapine is a strong sedative, rather than an antidepressant. Yet few people in the psychopharmacuetical field have re-explored the anti-histamine model of depression relief. Instead, the SSRIs are peddled, despite the fact that most of them cause akathasia (where one's anxiety morphs into an extreme case of nerves with attendant restlessness) which is actually due to serotonin re-uptake inhibition. If you actually want to calm a person down after taking an SSRI, just have mirtazapine prescribed with it, since its sedative effects are caused by anti-histamine side effects.
Doctors have a short explanation for the way medications work: "Modern science does not know exactly how psychopharmaceuticals work, but they work."
However, the ones that harm you less and allow you to explore the world actually work more effectively than the ones that lead you to seek the comfort of your bed and that occasional evening snack.
Originally posted: December 24, 2012 2:30 PM
Reference:
Paroxetine: Controversy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paroxetine#Controversy
He suggests by showing tempting visions to distract the faithful, though man's thoughts are easily distracted by this images of temptation.
However, satan is no master of mind control. Only a person has control of his or her mind, but may decide at his will to place faith in a leader out of compliant need of an authority figure.
With suggestion, satan might tempt such a figure, but that person may be so egocentric that the thought of being tempted by satan never crosses his mind. Yet he is not so egocentric as to deny the existence of God, which happens when one's ego becomes so big that the shining of his imagination is mistaken for "no God but I".
Today, the modern terms for human behavior influenced by satan are "mental illness" and "the evil that men do." However, most mental illnesses have nothing to do with satan according to the biochemical model. This theoretical model denies supernatural influence on human behavior, and substitutes the biochemical "superstition" for the spiritual one.
For the biochemical model of mental illness is a superstition because much of the reasoning that explains how psychiatric medications work is theory, and often certain medications do not work as the literature says.
A famous example of this is paxil (paroxetine): Glaxo-Smith-Kline claimed that the antidepressant had few withdrawal symptoms. However, it turned out that research which indicated that test patient indeed did have problems with withdrawal from the medication was suppressed and a big court case was fought over it.
Another example is mirtazapine, which is a sedative affecting the histamine receptors. When 30+ mg of mirtazapine is administered, the anti-histamine properties lead to changes in serotonin levels which affected the adrenalin receptors, leading to changes in alertness.
Mirtazapine actually reduces the serotonin-meditated side effect of nausea, due to its anti-histamine effect. As well, it also improves access to memory, resulting in a nootropic effect. Despite the initial anti-histamine effect, the brain adapts to the changes that mirtazapine causes, resulting in changes in sleep behavior at night, leading one to wake up hungry and willing to snack.
Though, the resulting sedation caused by mirtazapine results in the ability to realize that life is go on. Then, after three months on the drug, one day it will poop out and the only thing to do at that point is taper off rather than play the frustrating game of "hoping the medication still works", which involves taking the first 15 mg dose in the morning and the last dose at bedtime.
Finally, after tapering off and enduring the mild chaos in the mind due to it, even one dose of mirtazapine has the effect of strong sedation, so strong that I wonder why I ever took it!
Overall, mirtazapine is a strong sedative, rather than an antidepressant. Yet few people in the psychopharmacuetical field have re-explored the anti-histamine model of depression relief. Instead, the SSRIs are peddled, despite the fact that most of them cause akathasia (where one's anxiety morphs into an extreme case of nerves with attendant restlessness) which is actually due to serotonin re-uptake inhibition. If you actually want to calm a person down after taking an SSRI, just have mirtazapine prescribed with it, since its sedative effects are caused by anti-histamine side effects.
Doctors have a short explanation for the way medications work: "Modern science does not know exactly how psychopharmaceuticals work, but they work."
However, the ones that harm you less and allow you to explore the world actually work more effectively than the ones that lead you to seek the comfort of your bed and that occasional evening snack.
Originally posted: December 24, 2012 2:30 PM
Reference:
Paroxetine: Controversy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paroxetine#Controversy
20130501
Bipolar World (poem)
In a world of manic depressives,
everyone self medicates,
be it alcohol,
recreational drugs,
religion, shopping or sex.
everyone self medicates,
be it alcohol,
recreational drugs,
religion, shopping or sex.
20121023
Update on My Medications
A couple days ago, I tried 10g of Reactine for its sedative properties. A mild sedation was experienced but it left me feeling anxious and edgy.
Since then I have not used any more cetirizine due to the anxiety.
However, I prefer flexeril for the sedation I get the day after.
This is what sedation feels like for me with either drug: I feel mellow, and am able to moderate my negative emotions and remain positive despite the stress of daily life.
Even the pain in my left shoulder went away on flexeril.
Usually I take gabapentin (Neurontin) with flexeril at bedtime. Gabapentin is used to moderate pain, and relieves my anxiety. Flexeril is a muscle relaxant.
Yo prevent dependence on gabapentin, I take 100-200 mg. Likewise for flexeril, the dose is 10 mg.
Neither drug causes physical dependence. However, one may become habituated to either drug over time.
As well, I have never noticed any changes in behavior that could not be explain by other factors such as stress.
Therefore, when used according to the recommended dose for each drug, flexeril and gabapentin are useful in getting adequate rest at night.
For me, both medications are safer than the alternative.
Disclaimer: I take no responsibility for any person taking any medication mentioned above at more than the recommended doses, either alone or mixed with other drugs.
Since then I have not used any more cetirizine due to the anxiety.
However, I prefer flexeril for the sedation I get the day after.
This is what sedation feels like for me with either drug: I feel mellow, and am able to moderate my negative emotions and remain positive despite the stress of daily life.
Even the pain in my left shoulder went away on flexeril.
Usually I take gabapentin (Neurontin) with flexeril at bedtime. Gabapentin is used to moderate pain, and relieves my anxiety. Flexeril is a muscle relaxant.
Yo prevent dependence on gabapentin, I take 100-200 mg. Likewise for flexeril, the dose is 10 mg.
Neither drug causes physical dependence. However, one may become habituated to either drug over time.
As well, I have never noticed any changes in behavior that could not be explain by other factors such as stress.
Therefore, when used according to the recommended dose for each drug, flexeril and gabapentin are useful in getting adequate rest at night.
For me, both medications are safer than the alternative.
Disclaimer: I take no responsibility for any person taking any medication mentioned above at more than the recommended doses, either alone or mixed with other drugs.
20121016
Musings on Anti-Oedipus
According to Anti-Oedipus authors Guattari and Deleuze, "schizophrenia is an extreme mental state co-existent with the capitalist system itself and capitalism keeps enforcing neurosis as a way of maintaining normality."
The suggestion here is that enforcing neurosis is the path to maintaining normality, and capitalism is the enforcer.
As welll, the unconscious undercurrent played out through forces of capitalism (jobs) may have a pseudo-schizophregenic component, of which schizophrenia is an extreme outcome.
My question is, why can't the root cause and effect of the anxiety-insomnia-hypomania-mania-psychoses pathway be properly managed?
I'm referring to stress, which initially causes insomnia due to the effect of anxiety but later evolves into the indirect cause of hypomania, mania and ultimately psychoses.
However, it is stress that activates schizotypies, which are originally benign eccentricities of personality, that may evolve into one of several different forms of schizophrenia, due to the effects of extreme stress and resultant anxiety.
Depression and mania are just expressions of the extreme spectrum of bathos and pathos which both plague and inspire creativity on anyone of suitable fortitude to live with their neuroses.
Of course, the cheap preventative and/or solution for mental illness is to get regular exercise, sleep the optimal 9 hours, and if need be, take the medication suited to a person's personality type to reduce anxiety and/or promote sleep.
If necessary, a few people will respond to something as safe as prescribed medication, provided that the patient BELIEVES that medication works. He also has FAITH that they do work, which strongly implies a placebo effect facilitated by his belief and faith.
Please note that the patient does need to believe in what his psychiatrist or family doctor says regarding medication, and must be positive toward medication using drugs which do the least harm to the patient.
Additionally, the prudent mental health consumer may substitute meditation for medication if the use of stronger medication is counterindicated, be it for ethical, financial, moral, political and/or religious reasons, provide that his belief that meditation works reinforces his faith in meditation and vice versa.
YMMV
References:
Wikipedia article on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Oedipus
20120530
Kratom & Ibogaine as Psychiatric Medication
It's been said that mental illness is manufactured by the State to control the people.
Now I do not know how true this is, because it gives the State too much credit. A more moderate stance is this: stress is known to cause insomnia, which may arise due to anxiety. Anxiety may arise out of fear, and most of that anxiety may due to anger about loss of control over our lives. While it's not all that simple, the remedy for insomnia before one becomes so tired that self control is sleep.
In the worst case scenario, the lack of sleep leads to mania and sometimes brief psychotic episodes. It's at this point that most people may get the first intervention for it in the form of anti-psychotics..
However, those drugs work via the placebo process since most of the anti-psychotics are hypnotics, and sleep aids the process by providing rest.
Ibogaine, that entheogenic African root, and kratom, that wonderful South-East Asian herb, are better than or equal to all psychiatric medications because of its profile: in low doses, it's a stimulant and in high doses, a sedative.
With chronic use, kratom is addictive but ibogaine will cure it. So, in a perfect world I would urge the medical community to provide an alternative to psychiatric medications with regulated use of kratom and ibogaine with therapy.
Unfortunately, this is not a perfect world. Therefore I would urge moderation in the use of kratom.
In fact, moderation preserves mental health. A little bit of caffeine is ok, but 6 cups of coffee is not moderation.
Getting back to kratom, it's unlikely the way it's presented to us in the West - it was an extract but was mixed with other herbs, all of them safe at the dose. If anything, I felt stimulated, because of its action in low doses. I am very doubtful it had much effect on me. It tasted more like an energy drink.
And that was the first time I drank it. Several weeks went by and I drank the second little bottle of this kratom drink. Nothing. Just endless energy for a little bit and then peace.
I drank those drinks back in June. It wasn't the cheapest energy drink, though.
That is the only reason why I didn't get any more. If kratom is the ideal drug to calm the mind, then my experience with it only seemed to fizzle because I'd expected something astounding. Instead, if I even had a placebo effect, then the energy I showed was a combination of wishful thinking and being jaded by energy drinks.
While kratom is helpful to some people, I believe my brain likes a sedative because being mellow is the most excellent state of mind. Under such conditions, it's hard to get upset and spiral into an anxiety-induced insomnia.
So like I said, moderation is the key and meditation is the finger pointing to the moon.
Now I do not know how true this is, because it gives the State too much credit. A more moderate stance is this: stress is known to cause insomnia, which may arise due to anxiety. Anxiety may arise out of fear, and most of that anxiety may due to anger about loss of control over our lives. While it's not all that simple, the remedy for insomnia before one becomes so tired that self control is sleep.
In the worst case scenario, the lack of sleep leads to mania and sometimes brief psychotic episodes. It's at this point that most people may get the first intervention for it in the form of anti-psychotics..
However, those drugs work via the placebo process since most of the anti-psychotics are hypnotics, and sleep aids the process by providing rest.
Ibogaine, that entheogenic African root, and kratom, that wonderful South-East Asian herb, are better than or equal to all psychiatric medications because of its profile: in low doses, it's a stimulant and in high doses, a sedative.
With chronic use, kratom is addictive but ibogaine will cure it. So, in a perfect world I would urge the medical community to provide an alternative to psychiatric medications with regulated use of kratom and ibogaine with therapy.
Unfortunately, this is not a perfect world. Therefore I would urge moderation in the use of kratom.
In fact, moderation preserves mental health. A little bit of caffeine is ok, but 6 cups of coffee is not moderation.
Getting back to kratom, it's unlikely the way it's presented to us in the West - it was an extract but was mixed with other herbs, all of them safe at the dose. If anything, I felt stimulated, because of its action in low doses. I am very doubtful it had much effect on me. It tasted more like an energy drink.
And that was the first time I drank it. Several weeks went by and I drank the second little bottle of this kratom drink. Nothing. Just endless energy for a little bit and then peace.
I drank those drinks back in June. It wasn't the cheapest energy drink, though.
That is the only reason why I didn't get any more. If kratom is the ideal drug to calm the mind, then my experience with it only seemed to fizzle because I'd expected something astounding. Instead, if I even had a placebo effect, then the energy I showed was a combination of wishful thinking and being jaded by energy drinks.
While kratom is helpful to some people, I believe my brain likes a sedative because being mellow is the most excellent state of mind. Under such conditions, it's hard to get upset and spiral into an anxiety-induced insomnia.
So like I said, moderation is the key and meditation is the finger pointing to the moon.
20110101
How I Overcame the Fear of Medication
I used to be afraid of medication until I tried them.
Now they have made it harder for nicotine to addict me, and even harder for THC to make me anxious and paranoid.
I'm even wise to the meth BS. Why would anyone take crappy street amphetamines when there are ADHD meds which are safer and less toxic when used as directed?
As well, if you seriously used nicotine, then you'd have an over-the-counter antidepressant in inhalant format called cigarettes. In low doses nicotine is a stimulant; in high doses, it is as effective as a first-generation anti-histamine in sedation and "calming the nerves".
The good news is, THC still is a sedative in low doses. The terrific news is, mirtazapine blocks the munchies because as an antihistamine, it's an effective sedative with munchies as side effect. :p
Of course, I'd never mix alcohol or hard drugs with my medication, because that's a waste of my effort to manage my disease, which is depression.
Since humor is a mature way of dealing with uncomfortable feelings of anxiety, fear and dread, I plan on dealing with depression with humor to counteract any negativity arising from those feelings.
In this way I have overcome my initial fear of medication by choosing which of them I wish to take. I chose mirtazapine because of its safety profile for sedative action, and chose gabapentin of its safety in relieving pain and helping me to express myself.
However, this blog entry does not represent the full picture of depression. It only represents the protective effect of mirtazapine and gabapentin on my brain. They are more useful than cigarettes and marijuana, because of their safety profile. Yet I would be foolish to solely rely on them, for they are not magic bullets.
References:
Nicotine's psychological effects: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine#Psychoactive_effects
Gabapentin and alcohol withdrawal syndrome: Am J Health-Syst Pharm—Vol 65 Jun 1, 2008
p. 1039
Comparison of Gabapentin and Phenobarbital for treatment of alcohol withdrawal: DOI: 10.1080/10550490500419110
Comparison of Gabapentin and bupropion SR for stopping smoking: Nicotine & Tobacco Research Volume 7, Number 5 (October 2005) 809–813
Gabapentin for stopping smoking: Nicotine & Tobacco Research Volume 9, Number 2 (February 2007) 291–298
Now they have made it harder for nicotine to addict me, and even harder for THC to make me anxious and paranoid.
I'm even wise to the meth BS. Why would anyone take crappy street amphetamines when there are ADHD meds which are safer and less toxic when used as directed?
As well, if you seriously used nicotine, then you'd have an over-the-counter antidepressant in inhalant format called cigarettes. In low doses nicotine is a stimulant; in high doses, it is as effective as a first-generation anti-histamine in sedation and "calming the nerves".
The good news is, THC still is a sedative in low doses. The terrific news is, mirtazapine blocks the munchies because as an antihistamine, it's an effective sedative with munchies as side effect. :p
Of course, I'd never mix alcohol or hard drugs with my medication, because that's a waste of my effort to manage my disease, which is depression.
Since humor is a mature way of dealing with uncomfortable feelings of anxiety, fear and dread, I plan on dealing with depression with humor to counteract any negativity arising from those feelings.
In this way I have overcome my initial fear of medication by choosing which of them I wish to take. I chose mirtazapine because of its safety profile for sedative action, and chose gabapentin of its safety in relieving pain and helping me to express myself.
However, this blog entry does not represent the full picture of depression. It only represents the protective effect of mirtazapine and gabapentin on my brain. They are more useful than cigarettes and marijuana, because of their safety profile. Yet I would be foolish to solely rely on them, for they are not magic bullets.
References:
Nicotine's psychological effects: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine#Psychoactive_effects
Gabapentin and alcohol withdrawal syndrome: Am J Health-Syst Pharm—Vol 65 Jun 1, 2008
p. 1039
Comparison of Gabapentin and Phenobarbital for treatment of alcohol withdrawal: DOI: 10.1080/10550490500419110
Comparison of Gabapentin and bupropion SR for stopping smoking: Nicotine & Tobacco Research Volume 7, Number 5 (October 2005) 809–813
Gabapentin for stopping smoking: Nicotine & Tobacco Research Volume 9, Number 2 (February 2007) 291–298
20101222
Update on my meds (the poem)
This update on my meds
shall be short and sweet.
It concerns my two heads,
one of which is mindfully sublimed
to ensure sanity for the other,
so that when I have climbed
out of the pit without a bother,
no failure shall I meet.
shall be short and sweet.
It concerns my two heads,
one of which is mindfully sublimed
to ensure sanity for the other,
so that when I have climbed
out of the pit without a bother,
no failure shall I meet.
20101023
Is Mirtazapine Also a Pain Reliever?
It's been four months since starting mirtazapine, and I'm taking 30 mg a day.
Indeed mirtazapine is great for helping me sleep, yet one unexpected side effect is pain relief.
Yes, mirtazapine and mild exercise appears to reduce pain (headache and toothache). While I do not know the reason for the pain relief, it may be due to self-hypnosis - mirtazapine being a hypnotic - and improved metabolism of cortisol due to exercise.
Sedation is the usual effect of a hypnotic, and this drug isn't any different in that respect. However, being used to the sedative effects of mirtazapine, its hypnotic effect has help put to work the cognitive behavioral therapy that my therapist is patiently teaching me.
Also, this drug has helped me to learn from my mistakes.
Although it is possible I can easily learn from those mistakes on my own without medication, mirtazapine provides the calmness and reduced anxiety needed to function more fully both at home and in public.
IMHO each and every challenge while on mirtazapine makes it a "wonder drug" for me.
Indeed mirtazapine is great for helping me sleep, yet one unexpected side effect is pain relief.
Yes, mirtazapine and mild exercise appears to reduce pain (headache and toothache). While I do not know the reason for the pain relief, it may be due to self-hypnosis - mirtazapine being a hypnotic - and improved metabolism of cortisol due to exercise.
Sedation is the usual effect of a hypnotic, and this drug isn't any different in that respect. However, being used to the sedative effects of mirtazapine, its hypnotic effect has help put to work the cognitive behavioral therapy that my therapist is patiently teaching me.
Also, this drug has helped me to learn from my mistakes.
Although it is possible I can easily learn from those mistakes on my own without medication, mirtazapine provides the calmness and reduced anxiety needed to function more fully both at home and in public.
IMHO each and every challenge while on mirtazapine makes it a "wonder drug" for me.
20100706
Being the Author Of Your Own Happiness
Depending on culture (especially who you hang out with), anti-depressants and related medication (psychopharmaceuticals) are either considered "bad medicine" or "cure-all".
IMHO anyone who considers psychopharmaceuticals "happy pills" may be substituting a socially acceptible form of medication for whatever recreational drug they used in their youth.
Rather than realizing that they are the authors of their own happiness, they may use magical thinking regarding their "meds".
Despite being a socially acceptable drug in moderation, alcohol is actually a "dirty" way of "being happy" when compared to psychopharmaceuticals because of its effects on brain chemistry (it targets all of them) and tolerance (you begin to need to drink more to get the same effect).
IMHO recreational drug users who consider psychopharmaceuticals to be "bad drugs" but refuse to consider their drug of choice to be a drug may also be ignorant of being authors of their own happiness without drugs.
Legal or not, it's not the drug that puts a smile on your face.
It's you.
Just as a person chooses to smile, he chooses to be happy. At the root of this choice is taking responsibility for one's happiness.
Of course, I am not talking about the giggly kind of happiness that is found at parties.
IMHO the closest example of happiness is serenity i.e. being the eye of the storm.
Where around me uncertainty may exist, deep within me, my heartmind is calm.
That's what makes me smile. :)
IMHO anyone who considers psychopharmaceuticals "happy pills" may be substituting a socially acceptible form of medication for whatever recreational drug they used in their youth.
Rather than realizing that they are the authors of their own happiness, they may use magical thinking regarding their "meds".
Despite being a socially acceptable drug in moderation, alcohol is actually a "dirty" way of "being happy" when compared to psychopharmaceuticals because of its effects on brain chemistry (it targets all of them) and tolerance (you begin to need to drink more to get the same effect).
IMHO recreational drug users who consider psychopharmaceuticals to be "bad drugs" but refuse to consider their drug of choice to be a drug may also be ignorant of being authors of their own happiness without drugs.
Legal or not, it's not the drug that puts a smile on your face.
It's you.
Just as a person chooses to smile, he chooses to be happy. At the root of this choice is taking responsibility for one's happiness.
Of course, I am not talking about the giggly kind of happiness that is found at parties.
IMHO the closest example of happiness is serenity i.e. being the eye of the storm.
Where around me uncertainty may exist, deep within me, my heartmind is calm.
That's what makes me smile. :)
20100623
Schizophrenia and Genius: It's All About the Medication
Schizophrenics tend to be very intelligent, but couldn't fathom that by behaving inappropriately would annoy the Establishment.
In most cases, schizophrenics are their worst enemy, because they are so honest they rock the boat.
The saddest thing though, is that most schizophrenics also engage in risky behavior (drug use & drinking), and wonder why they are anxious and paranoid.
Yet some of them do not consciously see the contradiction of self medication and their fear of psychopharmaceuticals. Though, I suspect that their unconscious realization of that contradiction explains their noncompliance.
IMHO self medication usually trips up the genius.
YMMV
In most cases, schizophrenics are their worst enemy, because they are so honest they rock the boat.
The saddest thing though, is that most schizophrenics also engage in risky behavior (drug use & drinking), and wonder why they are anxious and paranoid.
Yet some of them do not consciously see the contradiction of self medication and their fear of psychopharmaceuticals. Though, I suspect that their unconscious realization of that contradiction explains their noncompliance.
IMHO self medication usually trips up the genius.
YMMV
20070724
How to Turn A Child Psychotic
Just put him on anti-depressants (paxil), psychostimulants (wellbutrin or adderall or ritalin), and anti-psychotics (haldol).
Then put him into the social welfare system (family services) and bounce him from foster care home to temporary residences for children at risk, when he goes berserk.
Within months he'll be another psychotic kid who is happiest when he's pulling stop signs out of the ground and beating up the care worker.
And the shrinks and social workers will pretend the medication isn't working and up his dose only to cause seizures that look like psychosis.
Hey dumb-asses!
Sedate the kid on clonezepam. Then put him on an atypical anticonvulsant like lamotrigine and ativan at bedtime.
Stop overstimulating his brain with useless anti-psychotics and psychostimulants.
Then put him into the social welfare system (family services) and bounce him from foster care home to temporary residences for children at risk, when he goes berserk.
Within months he'll be another psychotic kid who is happiest when he's pulling stop signs out of the ground and beating up the care worker.
And the shrinks and social workers will pretend the medication isn't working and up his dose only to cause seizures that look like psychosis.
Hey dumb-asses!
Sedate the kid on clonezepam. Then put him on an atypical anticonvulsant like lamotrigine and ativan at bedtime.
Stop overstimulating his brain with useless anti-psychotics and psychostimulants.
20070610
Am I the Face of Borderline Personality Disorder?
June 10, 2007:This is the face of borderline personality disorder, before meds. I was diagnosed in 1991 and never placed on medication.
Reason: BPD people should never be given meds because they will get annoyed, take a whole lot of them, and play medication roulette. Then they will tell their docs, "Your meds are not working."
Heck, we don't even go for therapy right away because we know the counsellors are incompetent and will misprescribe and give us something that will addict us and cause the suicide bids.
So my GP saved my life from the misery of medication.
20130111.1706: First I deny I am borderline; and then I affirm the diagnosis. That does not sound like borderline personality disorder. It seems more like I'm pigeon-holing the diagnosis.
20070330
Sometimes Drugs Cause Aggression
A final issue related to confounding is the effect of psychiatric medications on aggression. In a review of clinical aspects of dangerous behaviour, Menuck (1983) describes a number of iatrogenic or paradoxical drug reactions including:
Tranquilizer-sedatives (e.g. benzodiazepine and barbiturates) may have a disinhibiting effect on affect and behaviour. Paradoxical drug reactions involving violent behaviour have been reported among incarcerated offenders, psychiatric patients, and control group volunteers receiving these drugs.
Drugs that are capable of producing hypomania may elicit aggressive behaviour by arousal of the central nervous system. Aggressive behaviour has been reported among persons treated with imipramine and amitriptyline, phenylzine, prednisone, and bromocriptine.
Neuroleptic drugs sometimes increase aggressivity. This phenomenon has been observed during both low and high dose pharmacotherapy.
Thus any aggression found in psychiatrically disabled people on medication is due to their medication, regardless of any denial by any one person on medication.
What actually has been found is that opioid disorder (addiction to painkillers) reduces aggression, and most people with such disorders are less likely to exhibit aggressive behavior leading to violence. Indeed, IMHO they are the most compliant of substance users.
However, IMHO hypomania caused by medication is no different from substance abuse with regard to increased aggression.
Therefore, non-violent methods of confrontation and intervention are required to reduce aggression, regardless of whether one's substance use is illicit or approved by their doctor.
With regard to behavior, there is no difference between medication and substance abuse.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)