Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

i dont know about autism, but i know a cat with severe adhd...at least, thats what i suspect. maybe it's autism. we can discuss that if you want. personally, i think its her colour. calicos always have 'issues'.

 

 

Whatever you do, keep the gun away from her.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 183
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Nuala = ADHD cat.

Mona = autistic cat. Not even Asperger's I fear.

 

this calico is incredibly smart(she can open doors..i mean..she'd figure out a way to climb chairs and over shelves ...and keep clawing the handle until the door opens..how smart is THAT?).... she is distressed by touch, hyper..HYPER active..extreme concentration some times (like when she's stalking someone...refused to budge once and almost got her skull crashed as the door shut)and absolutely scatter brained...zinging and bouncing off the walls other times. she wont make eye contact and is very hostile/suspicious towards any new cats. extremely affected by change...if there is a new arrival, she'd disappear for days to register her displeasure. extreme sense of entitlement. mood swings every 10 minutes. too much attitude. in other words, you exist only if she wants you to..else she is alone and the reigning queen of her world.

 

i bet she'll know how to use a gun. i just have to figure out a way to make her obey my instructions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To our dear member who keeps reloading this topic at incredible speed (you know who you are), you were the one causing the site slowness over the past couple of days, please cut it out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Senators weigh bill to bolster drug safety

[..]

A key provision would require the FDA to review the safety of many new medications 18 months and again three years after their initial approval, and to conduct routine surveillance of public and private medical databases to track harmful side effects. There is wide agreement the current system for tracking the safety of drugs already on the market is ineffective.

 

The legislation also would provide the agency with authority to prohibit some new direct-to-consumer drug advertisements for as long as two years after a product's launch; empower the agency to require pharmaceutical companies to conduct postmarket studies of new medications; and set deadlines for revisions of drug warning labels when problems arise.

 

(FB comment: if there needs to be a bill to enforce ALL that, how does the FDA approve drugs right now?)

 

In addition, the bill would increase the so-called user fees drug and medical device makers pay the FDA to fund the review and approval of new medicines and devices.

 

The FDA has come under heavy criticism from members of Congress and a host of medical and consumer advocates because of numerous health problems caused by prescription drugs after they have been approved. This has included antidepressants, the antibiotic Ketek and the withdrawn painkiller Vioxx, a once-popular Merck drug that was linked to heart attacks and strokes.

 

The Institute of Medicine said last year the FDA lacks the tools to monitor and assess the safety of newly marketed drugs and does not have the authority to rapidly act when safety problems are discovered.

[..]

 

further:

 

Modesto Bee: Role of antidepressants in killings needs review

(i agree with the article..but re the characters interviewed, with some reservations

 

psychiatric drugs behind virginia tech shootings?

Link to post
Share on other sites

To our dear member who keeps reloading this topic at incredible speed (you know who you are), you were the one causing the site slowness over the past couple of days, please cut it out.

:lol: :ph43r:

I am afraid of picking my nose in front of my monitor as Orik might be watching.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The legislation also would provide the agency with authority to prohibit some new direct-to-consumer drug advertisements for as long as two years after a product's launch; empower the agency to require pharmaceutical companies to conduct postmarket studies of new medications; and set deadlines for revisions of drug warning labels when problems arise.

 

(FB comment: if there needs to be a bill to enforce ALL that, how does the FDA approve drugs right now?)

By trials performed before the release of the drugs.

 

Stupid, scaremongering article.

 

It is true that SSRIs have been associated with suicidal ideation and other adverse reactions but only in a small minority of cases. (And, of course, these drugs are only taken by those who are already depressed.) But there is absolutely no evidence that this shooting was related to taking SSRIs.

 

I don't wish to minimize the seriousness of adverse reactions to psychoactive drugs, which clearly need to be studied (and are), and it may be true that those taking the drugs should be carefully monitored. But the prevalence of depression is about 10% in this county and suicide is the 11th leading cause of death. If antidepressants can help alleviate some of that misery then I think we have to tolerate the rare occasions that they do more harm than good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just curious. Is there any statistical evidence proving suicide or homicide while solely under the influence of smoking marijuana? I am not an advocate here, just wish some evil people could spend more time giggling and munching.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The legislation also would provide the agency with authority to prohibit some new direct-to-consumer drug advertisements for as long as two years after a product's launch; empower the agency to require pharmaceutical companies to conduct postmarket studies of new medications; and set deadlines for revisions of drug warning labels when problems arise.

 

(FB comment: if there needs to be a bill to enforce ALL that, how does the FDA approve drugs right now?)

By trials performed before the release of the drugs.

 

i have heard of such things before. the question is... by whom? by the fda or by the drug companies themselves?

 

Stupid, scaremongering article.

 

It is true that SSRIs have been associated with suicidal ideation and other adverse reactions but only in a small minority of cases. (And, of course, these drugs are only taken by those who are already depressed.) But there is absolutely no evidence that this shooting was related to taking SSRIs.

 

I don't wish to minimize the seriousness of adverse reactions to psychoactive drugs, which clearly need to be studied (and are), and it may be true that those taking the drugs should be carefully monitored. But the prevalence of depression is about 10% in this county and suicide is the 11th leading cause of death. If antidepressants can help alleviate some of that misery then I think we have to tolerate the rare occasions that they do more harm than good.

 

my problem with ssris is not their prescription and usage, but the way the receipients are not monitored. at the end of the day, what is the measure of 'acceptable risk'? and who decides that?

 

should we take a poll of all middle agers to find out how often they felt suicidal, how many of them wanted to go on a killing spree when they were teenagers? these are my questions. and they are sincere doubts about other countries. is depression/suicidal tendencies an american phenomena? what are the statistics for other countries? what are the statistics for other countries where anti depressants are prescribed with gay abandon? who collects these statistics? is it a genetic 'problem'? are there not ranges for any kind of depression/suicidal tendency.....from that which are alleviated by a good old 'getting it out of the system' talk in order to get out of depression to severe brain chemical imbalance that is been passed from generation to generation? i know that many women rely on drugs to get out of the post partum funk. how do other women in other countries where prescribing antidepressants is not common cope? and if they do indeed need some form of therapy, how long do they stay on it and how functional are they after they come out of it? and finally, how many countries have television and print advertisements that aim to 'nudge' the patient to ask about certain prescription drugs? i realise that i risk sounding like an absolute luddite/rock dweller/tom cruisque when i criticise drug prescription and usage, but i also think that a responsible society must ask responsible questions when individual issues of sanity affect the collective welfare.

 

secondly, distrubingly, i have also heard that general practioners sometimes prescribe antidepressants and its ilk. this practice, imo, is dodgy.

 

re no evidence that ssris are related to the shootings, we dont know either way because as far as i know, no information has been released. yet. still. and that is problematic to me.

 

edited to add because my formatting is fucked today..

 

 

nobody has a problem declaring that they are taking medications for flu or for allergies. but considering the ssris and their ilk are freely advertised, there is still reluctance in accepting that one is on these medications. this is more than odd. by comparison, how many television ads run for cancer or hiv medication? sleep aids, allergies and medicines for depression. how many ssri television ads even bring up the issue of post partum depression? every person suffering from life style maladjustment feels 'special' and ill and in need of pharmaceutical interference AT ONCE. my current project is to collect all the newspaper articles and television commercials that shill for prozac and co for a show. the absurdity and callousness of it all will hopefully sink in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Purely anecdotal, but of the countless friends and family who have been helped by SSRIs, none have been armed. The one murder in our family was because someone was allowed to buy a rifle after being released from a mental hospital. Still had her hospital bracelet on, too. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

(FB comment: if there needs to be a bill to enforce ALL that, how does the FDA approve drugs right now?)

 

With all due respect, let us wander back down the trail to the aromas of cooking stones and spices. If you wish to understand the inner workings of the FDA or even USDA, all you have to do is set aside the next couple of years of your life with a full set of CFR's, latest case law, and cooperating eyesight. That will at least skim the surface foam.

Link to post
Share on other sites
i have heard of such things before. the question is... by whom? by the fda or by the drug companies themselves?

By the drug companies but monitored by the FDA. There is no other way to do it.

 

my problem with ssris is not their prescription and usage, but the way the receipients are not monitored. at the end of the day, what is the measure of 'acceptable risk'? and who decides that?

Society.

 

is depression/suicidal tendencies an american phenomena?

No.

 

what are the statistics for other countries?

Similar.

 

what are the statistics for other countries where anti depressants are prescribed with gay abandon?

Similar.

 

is it a genetic 'problem'?

Yes.

 

are there not ranges for any kind of depression/suicidal tendency.....from that which are alleviated by a good old 'getting it out of the system' talk in order to get out of depression to severe brain chemical imbalance that is been passed from generation to generation?

Yes. The figures I quoted are for major depressive disorder (aka clinical depression). I repeat. Depression is the 11th leading cause of death in the US.

 

i know that many women rely on drugs to get out of the post partum funk. how do other women in other countries where prescribing antidepressants is not common cope?

Worse.

 

and finally, how many countries have television and print advertisements that aim to 'nudge' the patient to ask about certain prescription drugs?

Most SSRIs are out of patent and so are not advertised.

 

secondly, distrubingly, i have also heard that general practioners sometimes prescribe antidepressants and its ilk. this practice, imo, is dodgy.

With that I agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The details are tedious, but what the FDA is obliged, authorized and empowered to do is very complex, governed by legislation, and inevitably constrained by budget. The FDA cannot simply adopt the attitude that manufacturers need to jump higher hurdles, or need to get drugs re-approved periodically. Congress has to be involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...