When Big Pharm attacks. | ADHD Information
ch jones, we are too much alike and wayy to compatible in thought. what meds are you using to defeat the vile one?All I can say - is it's more complex than it's being made out.
I wasn't looking to fight this out with anyone - especially you - just to inform.
I will agree to disagree on this survey - surveys in general as it's not working. I obviously don't have the skills to teach this at this point so I will stop.
My apologies - I've kept everyone tied up on this thread far too long.
oh goodness --- i did it again. and i really don't mean to.
i have to go anyway.
the statistics say what they say. if you read them differently then put out your reading of them and i am very happy to discuss that rather than the subject of statistics in general which i think is off-point.
but later, as i have to go.....
chjones,
The "report" I posted was just a chunk of the Khan report. My stats were all the conclusions from all the published reports.... over 70,000 patients and a suicide ratio for antidepressants of 65 times the norm. These were the actual statistics that Dr. Khan received.
Glen's post was the actual Khan report about an analysis of the FDA clinical trial reports.
The figures are quite different.... which leads me to suspect that the drug companies paid Dr. Khan to ease up on his report. But, the media got ahold of ALL the stats and published them in various news articles. I go by the media's accounting of the statistics.
And what's really depressing is that these stats come from the PUBLISHED reports. If things go badly for a drug company at the beginning of a trial, they can just stop the trial and not publish any results.
There are lots and lots of "unpublished clinical trials".
glen - even then it is not totally valid because you can't be sure that your source 100 percent is necessarily representative of the whole population. for example you could get 50 people in a room and give them all peanuts and none of them died and then you cannot extrapolate that to say that 100 percent of people in the world are not allergic to peanuts..... just remember???of almost 50,000 (or whatever it was) 777 or so people committed suicide and calculated down into percentages it meant that the percentage of those on the meds was - what was it 0.59 and those off the meds on placebos 0.45 and those on non-SSRI meds similar (i can't see the page right now so i can't quote them exactly)
i find your attitude a little perplexing. are you trying now to say his stats aren't valid? or what?
i find slightly offensive this apparent continuation of the assumption that we cannot read statistics. as if by that you gain some validity of your point of view --- and by going from your own example above i would hesitate to accept your own excellence in the subject - no matter how many primers you have in your closet??? hmmm....
Agreed - but I didn't bring this one out - reality did. The meds they tested were a lot of heavy-duty antidepressants and even an anti-convulsant. Many of these meds would never be given to someone coming in to an MD saying they don't feel happy. Many would be given to someone found jumping off a bridge or wandering around naked outside. Very heavy duty so you can assume many of these people had plans to do themselves in when not attended to.
Stats are confusing. I can recommend a couple primers if you'd like - I'll have to check way back in my closets but I might still have a couple.
stats aren't that fricking confusing unless people deliberate skew them to suit the agenda they went in with in the first place, which is what i can't stand.so are you are saying he has deliberately skewed the stats and you have some other ones that 'apparently' say differently. because what is the point, then Glen really. why should i 'believe' these new ones over the old ones.
that is my whole point. the TRUTH is what is relevant not some stupid biased info from a govt or pharma sponsored report or some equally biased anti-med report. why is it seemingly SO impossible to get any honesty on this subject.
i don't want to hear another frickin report. for what??? really, for what??? they are as bad as each other. if yours is radically different to this - then what, who to believe.
yes, these people had plans to do themselves in. of course, they did for crying out loud that's the whole point to put them on the meds. and the meds were full on ineffective in stopping a single potential suicide by the looks of this report.
now, i don't give a sh*t who takes what drug. but if you are sitting there thinking my husband is depressed there could be side-effects to putting him on a drug as well as the cash involved but the benefits are "he won't kill himself" therefore i will take the possible, potential side-effects because this is one HUGE benefit and then you find out that this benefit is non-existant. then would you choose the meds at all.
why would you bother when they are as effective as a placebo apparently in stopping your loved ones from doing themselves in.
that's crap. as a result that's crap. the one thing they are designed to do and they are manifestly not doing it........
for crying out loud! that's bullsh*t.
GLEN !!!!!
"Many of these meds would never be given to someone coming in to an MD saying they don't feel happy. "
DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE THAT !!!!!
IN MANY OF THE FIRST CLINICAL TRIALS THEY SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED DEPRESSED PEOPLE AND STILL.... PEOPLE IN THE TRIALS WERE COMMITING SUICIDE !!
SSRI ANTIDEPRESSANTS HAVE BEEN PRESCRIBED FOR ... DEPRESSION, OCD, ODD, SAD, GAD, PMS, PMDD, WEIGHT LOSS AND EVEN TO QUIT SMOKING !!!
Statistics are confusing - but they are important. They get the street you are on repaired (hopefully), pay for hospitals and police stations being built, and tell us something about the medications, foods and spirits we imbibe. But if you give a stat to someone who doesn't understand - it can be read whichever way you chose to. The only way a stat becomes a really useful tool is to present it to someone who is both: trusted by you to be truthful, and at least competent in statistical analysis. You don't trust them - forget it. They are not statistically savvy - why bother?
Also - just as our meds aren't a cure - antidepressants are supposed to be used together with therapy. An antidepressant is supposed to bring the person a little stability in emotions - a way to feel a little more normal than before. Does it cure anything? None of them do! Even lithium - the greatest med for schizophrenic disorders, does no more than keep the person grounded. Take it away - and they go right back to being ill.
If someone takes a serious antidepressant for being self-destructive - then you go "off you go - come back in a month!" - guess what happens????
[QUOTE=reality]GLEN !!!!!
"Many of these meds would never be given to someone coming in to an MD saying they don't feel happy. "
DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE THAT !!!!!
IN MANY OF THE FIRST CLINICAL TRIALS THEY SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED DEPRESSED PEOPLE AND STILL.... PEOPLE IN THE TRIALS WERE COMMITING SUICIDE !!
SSRI ANTIDEPRESSANTS HAVE BEEN PRESCRIBED FOR ... DEPRESSION, OCD, ODD, SAD, GAD, PMS, PMDD, WEIGHT LOSS AND EVEN TO QUIT SMOKING !!!
[/QUOTE]
Actually I just checked the full paper by Dr. Khan... They only excluded patients with a "demonstrated history of suicidal behavior". Most people who succeed at suicide show no prior history. The ones who "try" are typically reaching out for help or attention.
Only one SSRI is prescribed for stopping smoking. It's use is not typically included in studies and personally - I have seen no information on it exclusively so I'm not going to comment.
The "typical" antidepressants were only one subgroup of the studied medications. Most of the meds were the stronger ones - prescribed for severe depression that typically most MDs would NOT use until the typical ones (fluoxetine, et.al.) were exhausted as viable.
Also - what's your background in statistical analysis reality? I would assume you at least have a freshman course in basic statistical analysis under your belt - or does your church/anti-med group tell you what to say very slowly?
But if you give a stat to someone who doesn't understand - it can be read whichever way you chose to. The only way a stat becomes a really useful tool is to present it to someone who is both: trusted by you to be truthful, and at least competent in statistical analysis. You don't trust them - forget it. They are not statistically savvy - why bother?don't fricking try to squirgel out of this glen by dishonestly implying that we can't read these statistics right. it's making me realise that you are equally as dishonest as everyone else you accuse of having a biased viewpoint here.
i hate that.
the statistics are right there. you flipping translate them if you think we have done such an incompetent job of it --- exactly what is it that i have said, that has been a mistranslation of these statistics - hmmm?
that f**king attitude of somehow trying to discredit someone who has an opposing attitude, i fricking hate it. it is the worst form of dishonesty. i would never have thought it of you Glen. really.
it infuriates me. what is it. what has not been truthful in my reading of those statistics. tell me. just lay it out there!
pisses me off.
Glen,
"Most of the meds were the stronger ones - prescribed for severe depression that typically most MDs would NOT use until the typical ones (fluoxetine, et.al.) were exhausted as viable."
What are these "stronger" meds for "severe depression" ?
Are you talking about the antiPSYCHOTICS ? Are severely depressed people PSYCHOTIC ? (Did you notice that the antipsychotics had a higher rate of suicide than the SSRIs?)
Are you saying that if the people are still alive and 'severely depressed" after trying all the antidepressants, doctors give them antipsychotics and they kill themselves ?
Glen.... I can interpret statistics far faster and better than you... so can chjones. You spend far too much time trying to twist them into a "pro med" interpretation.
I don't belong to a church and no one tells me what to say.
i'm sorry glen that was a bit harsh --- i don't like it when i believe someone is being dishonest. it gets me and that subtle dishonesty by implication rather than outright just addressng the facts gets me worst.just forget it --- i didn't mean it to be a personal attack. i am not into those either.
it really doesn't matter to me enough. to start being nasty ----
I can understand why you are mad at the whole idea of stats. That's why nobody believes polls for politics, opinions, etc.
The thing you need to remember - they took stats from a very small group of people. whenever you do that (they looked at thousands and there are millions taking the meds), you have to take what you call a sampling variance. You see that in polls - where they say "accuracy plus or minus 2 or 3 percent".
The numbers between the placebo and actual med takers is close = close when you calculate them over the real population.
They have a formula for that - they take the whole group, multiply it by a number for actual pop divided by sample group. They take that number and put in error variance (confidence interval)- to remove data that could have been fouled up, or people that were removed from the group for not following double-blind protocol. Now, you put in patient exposure years - which will calculate out the odds of each patient each year committing suicide any given year if on placebo. Follow so far?
Taking ALL that into consideration - the numbers are within what the scientists would consider a normal variation between placebo and meds - numbers close enough that they can be discounted as random - i.e. they could just be for reasons other than medication-caused.
Remember - I'm on the side of each person decides. I don't shove meds down people's throats - but I think they belong on the long list of things we can do to help our ADHD.
What I don't like is this black-and-white idea that a med because a survey says there's an increased chance of harm in some cases, you should NEVER use it.
[QUOTE=GlenW]RESULTS: Of 48,277 depressed patients participating in the trials, 77 committed suicide. Based on patient exposure years, similar suicide rates were seen among those randomly assigned to an SSRI (0.59%, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.31%–0.87%), a standard comparison antidepressant (0.76%, 95% CI=0.49%–1.03%), or placebo (0.45%, 95% CI=0.01%–0.89%). CONCLUSIONS: These findings fail to support either an overall difference in suicide risk between antidepressant- and placebo-treated depressed subjects in controlled trials or a difference between SSRIs and either other types of antidepressants or placebo.
[/QUOTE]wait glen. just explain this the randomly assigned SSRIs had a rate of 0.59 and the placebos had a rate of 0.45. the placebo is lower right!
wtf --- i like this guy less and less. am i not reading the statistics right? how can you say that there is no difference when right above it says there is a difference... what statistically it is not big enough or what. similar suicide risks bewteeen the two groups (that's crap anyway! i thought it would be a lot more for those on placebo - not similar, why the frick are they taking the drug in the first place then....
i don't like this guy. i don't believe him to be honest here. i specifically dislike the
Based on patient exposure years,
that sounds like a deliberate corollary - if i didn't already suspect him i might let it go. but that sounds like if you were to take the experiment as a whole and the 777 out of 48,000 or whatever it is, regardless of exposure years (ie including the newer to the drugs or the newer to the feelings of depression) it might well work out that the result was significantly higher in those taking the anti-depressants. or the other way round -- significantly lower. depending on who he was writing this for and i just LOATHE that.
fricking basic dishonesty.
stick with the facts m****f****! don't put out spurious conclusions that are inconsistent and covered by corollaries.
i hate this guy already.
i wouldn't trust a single word that comes out of his mouth - he is one of those disreputable scientists who can be bought to say anything any govt, any special interest group want him to say. i LOATHE with a passion people like that - who distort the truth for their own gain.
the truth is what is important. frick political correctness. the truth. the sodding truth and as far as i can see this guy has a spurious sodding relation to the truth ----
just my not so humble opinion.
don't get me wrong here. i have no agenda where SSRIs are concerned. i could get this riled up over ANY subject where i feel people are deliberately distorting the truth
i mean just get me started on that flat out LIAR tony blair and his bullsh*t with those weapons of mass destruction. i am the same. i do not believe that anybody has a right to lie to the people of their country because they want to manipulate them toward a certain viewpoint. just the TRUTH will do me fine. thanks.
f*****rs the lot of them.
and i am just gonna edit but why would an 'anti-med' site put in this statistic when it is so obviously against their cause:
Suicide rates were higher, in the trials taken as a whole, for patients
who were assigned to placebo than to the investigational drug
(1,750/100,000 persons per year vs. 710/100,000 persons per year).
where did they get those figures from if not his report - and so why has he suddenly changed his figures, which time was he lying?
chjones38654.5652083333
[QUOTE=chjones]i'm sorry glen that was a bit harsh --- i don't like it when i believe someone is being dishonest. it gets me and that subtle dishonesty by implication rather than outright just addressng the facts gets me worst.
just forget it --- i didn't mean it to be a personal attack. i am not into those either. 
it really doesn't matter to me enough. to start being nasty ----
[/QUOTE]
LOL - I would hope you have seen enough of me that you know I'm thick skinned. I know where you come from - it's where I was not long ago.
I'm kind of on a journey in my life - I wanted SO bad to get better that I will do whatever it takes. Because I'm on therapy and meds - my mind is solid, my opinion of myself and things I hold as truths unshakable. You could call me anything you like - like a bullet on superman's ass.
If I can't explain this right - I chalk it up to me not being good enough at this to be able to explain. Not you being dumb. This is not high-school science - it's tough! I guarantee reality has no clue of what stats mean - or he'd have told me he does and tried to contradict me. Maybe he'll go get his big bro.
well don't let the beneficial effects that meds have had for you, screw your impartiality when looking at straightforward stats....they speak for themselves and i am quite capable of reading them. no matter what.
i am very glad the meds have worked for you and i know that to be true, i have reiterated that on post after post that it is easy to see the beneficial effects that the Adderall has had for you and parritthead etc.
but don't lose your neutrality or your posts become no more valid than ADHDISBOGUS's for example.
just stupid ranting and twisting of facts to support your viewpoint.
the TRUTH is always the most vital thing. whether it is unpalatable for you or not. this study may have been skewed by various factors that we will don't yet know about --- but as it stands, it points out clearly that the meds have had NO positive effect in stopping severely depressed people from committing suicide.
now whether you choose to believe that Dr Khan would have run a study where there was no therapy involved at the same time - perhaps that's true, it seems a little callous and unlikely however it is possible i am sure. but until someone reads the full report then, that we can't know.
as it stands though it says clearly --- the meds were totally ineffective in stopping suicides and i, for one, am very surprised... really extremely surprised.
i had always thought the meds 'could' react badly with some people and so on but that it was a statistically tiny minority and worth the risk because for the 'majority' they were extremely successful in stopping suicidal behaviour --- and that doesn't seem to be the case at all.
Just remember - a stat is only valid without working in calculations when it's 100 percent of the people in the sample. Even if you get 1 million people out of 120 million taking a med - that's still under one percent of the total - and you need to make sure it represents the whole as close as you can!!
Dr. Khan reported an analysis of clinical trial data for drugs approved
by the Food and Drug Administration between 1985 and 2000. This included suicide and attempted suicide rates for more than 71,604 patients treated with the atypical antipsychotics risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine; all the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; nefazodone, mirtazapine, and bupropion; the benzodiazepine alprazolam; and the anticonvulsant valproate.
One striking finding was the elevated rate of completed suicides for
patients during these trials. Compared with the rate of 11/100,000
persons per year for the population at large, the rates of completed
suicide were 752/100,000 persons per year for those in antipsychotic
trials; 718 in antidepressant trials; 425 in trials of medication for
social anxiety disorder; 136 for panic disorder; and 105 for
obsessive-compulsive disorder.
GEE GLEN.... I WONDER WHO PAID DR. KHAN TO PUBLISH THE SAME FACTS AND CLAIM THERE WAS NO CORRELATION.
AND IF THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SSRI AND PLACEBO RELATED SUICIDES.... THEN WHY ARE THERE BLACK BOX WARNINGS ON SSRIS ABOUT SUICIDE ???
Suicide rates were higher, in the trials taken as a whole, for patientswho were assigned to placebo than to the investigational drug
(1,750/100,000 persons per year vs. 710/100,000 persons per year).
In the case of trials for depression and anxiety disorders, suicide
rates were in fact higher among those who received the investigational
drug than placebo, Dr. Khan said.
i don't get this bit --- is that not contradictory? where is he getting his data from for the last paragraph and why does he not include those statistics rather than the ones which say the exact opposite?
chjones38654.5381828704
Reality - you lie with Dr. Khan to back you up - I give you the REAL results and you ask who paid him? Cyclical reasoning - man you are messed up! Better go back to scientology HQ for a reprogramming you are getting sloppy.
These findings fail to support either an overall difference in suicide risk between antidepressant- and placebo-treated depressed subjects in controlled trials or a difference between SSRIs and either other types of antidepressants or placebo.
well this is just bullsh*t -- how can you come up with first. they were worse off on the placebos. second. they were better off on the placebos. third. it was exactly the same on the placebos
i mean talk about covering all your bases. what a pile of crap! make up your mind you f**kwit.
he is obviously just saying whatever anyone who is paying him to do the research wants to hear. on both sides. what a waste of space. i have no time for people who have no regard for the truth!!!!
chjones38654.5373032407
[QUOTE=chjones]Suicide rates were higher, in the trials taken as a whole, for patients
who were assigned to placebo than to the investigational drug
(1,750/100,000 persons per year vs. 710/100,000 persons per year).
In the case of trials for depression and anxiety disorders, suicide
rates were in fact higher among those who received the investigational
drug than placebo, Dr. Khan said.
i don't get this bit --- is that not contradictory? where is he getting his data from for the last paragraph and why does he not include those statistics rather than the ones which say the exact opposite?
[/QUOTE]
Reality is lying. The "report" he uses is from anti-med sites that stripped important correlative data from Dr. Khan's report - then called it their "proof". A lie. That's all it was.
When confronted by the truth- all I get is - "I wonder who paid him"? What is that?
well i think Dr Khan is a f**kwit, myself.and i simply am not inclined to someone who will change his point of view every five minutes.
on either side. waste of fricking space - that's it. total waste.
[QUOTE=chjones] These findings fail to support either an overall difference in suicide risk between antidepressant- and placebo-treated depressed subjects in controlled trials or a difference between SSRIs and either other types of antidepressants or placebo.
well this is just bullsh*t -- how can you come up with first. they were worse off on the placebos. second. they were better off on the placebos. third. it was exactly the same on the placebos
i mean talk about covering all your bases. what a pile of crap! make up your mind you f**kwit.
he is obviously just saying whatever anyone who is paying him to do the research wants to hear. on both sides. what a waste of space. i have no time for people who have no regard for the truth!!!!
[/QUOTE]
Just keep in mind that reality's version of this report wasn't even IN the report. It was an anti-med "news" report on the test that they stripped and took only what they thought would support their way of looking at it. It has NO relation to the report. Dr. Khan is a very respected scientist - while reality is a troll.
That's why slinging numbers around in statistics is hard to understand unless you are a statistician. He isn't being dishonest - just using terminology that is hard to understand.
When the numbers are there - you see the numbers without the calculations that they do to weed out standard error (a calculation that factors out mistakes, patients quitting, data being incorrect), then what's left is so close according to the scientists that they cancel each other out. Basically - the percentages of with placebo and with med are so close that there is not a difference that points at medicine being the factor for the suicides. It most likely is that the patients would have committed suicide with or without meds.
But what reality put on his post was the raw data with comments that had nothing to do with the scientists.
Also - keep in mind that the meds used in this study are mostly heavy-duty meds you won't find most people taking outside of a very rigid doctor's plan - and many of the meds are specifically for people with very bad depressions. The kind that people commit suicide from.
He's just some wacko dude on a crusade who will post whatever he wants to prove his bias and one sided opinion.
All I know is this. Realty lied about having a child who died as a result of ADHD medication. I really can't place any truth in what this manipulative bastard has to say.
Care to share any more personal stories with us Reality? Perhaps you can dig up a dead daughter or two while you are at it....
chjones,
I strongly suspect that the suicide rates were higher among those who were assigned to placebos because of the way they conduct clinical trials.
During a clinical trial you are given either a placebo or the drug. Then after a period of testing, your "pill" is switched with the opposite of whatever you were taking.
This can lead to withdrawals if you were on the drug first and that's what gov'ts are now warning about on SSRIs. The most dangerous times on an SSRI are at the start and if you stop suddenly.
Dr. Khan collected data from all the PUBLISHED reports and then carefully worded it to ignore most of the suicides. But the actual statistics are rather damning.
yeah and the answer to that is the meds aren't helping people to stop to commit suicide are they - you might as well be on a placebo, ie take nothing or whistling danny boy, as pay a fortune for SSRIs that make sod-all difference, apparently.don't patronise me sdw227 cos i am in a sh*tty mood this morning. i understand that he was implying that there wasn't a statistically big enough significant difference... that's why i said 'what statistically it is not big enough?'
i may come across that way sometimes but i am not completely stupid in the head.
the point is, this report reads skewed to me. i would be interested also to know what the results were not based on similar exposure years (and before you patronise me again i understand that that is a valid comparison and corollarly to have, i understand that you may well have to take factors into account such as length and types of depression before making a straight out comparison when so many similar differences could be affecting the results).
either way. i find it rather shocking that there is no significant difference and what's more the insignificance sides toward the fact that you are less likely to commit suicide on the placebo. i find that incredibly shocking and not what i was expecting at all. i was far more of the opinion of the original (perhaps false) statistic of the rate being more than twice on the placebo the 1,750 to 710 statistic.
and i would like to know where that statistic came from too....
i don't trust Dr Khan, which is a shame because i generally have a very high opinion of Sikh people but perhaps he isn't a Sikh? who knows?
Actually Khan is a muslim - and he's a very good scientist and well respected scholar. and that means what exactly? i am sure Lewis Libby was a very excellent back-room politician and respected aide - didn't stop him from being a total lying scumbag did it?
nah, nah i'm joking. ok, i take it back - i get a little pissed when i see: they are worse, they are the same, they are better????? all apparently coming from the same scientist on the same subject...
but i take your word for it that the report is being mis-represented and that is where the confusion has come from.
although i think the report is worrying in many ways...
no statistical difference. i thought these drugs were supposed to help, dramatically! for crying out loud. there should be a difference. there should be! that is what they are there to do ---- isn't it?
You mean depressed people are more pron to suicide. Wow, I'm just shocked! You mean there is a higher ratio of depressed people on antidepressants? Wow, I'm shocked again!!!
The world is more complex and dangerous than it has ever been before. No wonder more people are killing themselves. It is very hard in todays society. To blame it all on drugs is simplistic at best.
GlenW,
Looks like I'll have to lower my rate of suicide on A/Ds.
You are only 65 TIMES MORE LIKELY TO COMMIT SUICIDE ON AN A/D... not 68 times. Sorry about that.
Anyway, here's a chunk of the report....
Original study: