This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Depression was sold to us as a simple problem of serotonin insufficiency, a convenient narrative that made drug companies like Eli Lilly, Forest Pharmaceuticals, and Pfizer very rich. As a former pharmaceutical advertising writer, I not only witnessed the explosive growth in antidepressant drugs, I contributed to it.
Psychiatry, along with the pharmaceutical industry, have been ostensibly busy looking for causes of mental distress but, unfortunately, they are looking in the wrong place. All that was revealed by the huge amounts of family therapy research became buried under the tidal wave of the pharmaceutical psychiatric industrial complex.
The journal continued to be in good hands, and thus one of the few journals that was receptive to research findings that belied the narrative of therapeutic progress that the psychiatric guild and pharmaceutical companies have been promoting for decades. He noted too the reluctance of the field to consider this possibility.
This pathologisation of suffering fuels a constant expansion of psychiatric categories, feeding the pharmaceutical industry and reinforcing the notion that there is a pill for every pain. Common human experiences — sadness, anxiety, grief, fatigue, disillusionment — are increasingly framed as mental disorders.
Maine) introduced a bill Thursday that would ban pharmaceutical manufacturers from using direct-to-consumer advertising, including social media, to promote their products. They want us to take on the greed of the pharmaceutical industry and ban these bogus ads.” From The Wall Street Journal : “Sens. Bernie Sanders (I.,
This study underscores the persistent gap between clinical prescribing practices and evidence-based safety for aging populations, highlighting how deeply entrenched assumptions about pharmaceutical solutions continue to shape care, even in the face of well-documented harms.
They looked at the largest, most influential clinical trials of antidepressants and found that almost half were so biased that they could be considered “seeding trials”—or studies that provide marketing materials for the pharmaceutical industry, not valid scientific data. Large trials are rare in the field of antidepressant research.
Or, perhaps more accurately, what happens when these messages are intentionally blocked out through various targeted therapies and pharmaceuticals? What happens when these messages are ignored? The failure of surface psychology is not difficult to understand.
Together, psychiatry and the pharmaceutical industry successfully promoted this narrative to the public, leading to a great expansion of the psychiatric enterprise. There was a dramatic increase in the number of people diagnosed, including the diagnosing of children, and a dramatic increase in the prescribing of psychiatric drugs.
Second, it provides an enormously lucrative market in which multinational pharmaceutical companies can peddle their pharmaceuticals (we can cure you with our SSRIs). First, it reinforces Capital’s drive towards atomistic individualization (you are sick because of your brain chemistry).
The medical community is comfortable acknowledging persistent brain injury from recreational drugs, yet remains silent when it comes to pharmaceuticals. Yet, when it comes to pharmaceutical drugs, we assume they are somehow cleaner simply because theyre prescribed. How Widespread Is Psychiatric Drug-Induced Brain Damage?
NRx Pharmaceuticals secures FDA fee waiver for NRX-100, a preservative-free ketamine aimed at treating suicidal depression, enhancing accessibility for patients.
Those trapped there due to their emotions, thoughts, and behaviors are controlled by pharmaceutical Americans and their cultish mindset hailing drugs at the expense of everything else. Of course, psychiatrists rarely say the quiet parts out loud; their status as pharmaceutical Americans could come into jeopardy if they did.
Stephenson and a team of researchers from various academic and pharmaceutical institutions, including the University of Virginia School of Medicine. Maelys Touya was an employee of Lundbeck LLC, and Lambros Chrones was an employee of Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., The study was authored by Judith J. Additionally, Anita H.
Yousaf Raza Illicit Ties with the Pharmaceutical Industry Prescribing more medications than are justified is the number-one crime of which a shamefully large number of psychiatrists are guilty. The answer is simple: it is also the standard that pharmaceutical companies hold us to. This is where the kickbacks come from.
The pharmaceutical industry has downplayed the risks of withdrawal symptoms following the discontinuation of antidepressant medications. Giovanni Fava posed a controversial question: could antidepressants be worsening the very conditions they were designed to treat?
Third, his journal told of the corrupting influence of pharmaceutical money on the creation of psychiatric diagnoses and drug trials. Whitaker: There are those two funding sources, open access where people have to pay, or journals where they’re basically funded by pharmaceutical advertisements. Fava: Right, and the libraries.
It doesnt seem beyond the realm of possibility that pharmaceutical companies would deliberately disrupt the conversation in similar ways, and indeed James Davies in his book Sedated gives evidenced examples of them selectively publishing research data on the efficacy of their drugs (Davies, 2022). Davies, 2013, p.30) & Trans.),
as they uncover the intricate dynamics of the Medical and Pharmaceutical Industry. From The Real Truth About Health : “Join us for an eye-opening discussion with Mary J. Ruwart, Ph.D., Robert Whitaker, and John Abramson, M.D. This discussion provides essential information to protect and promote your health.”
Levine regarding the problem of depression in America. ” Back to Around the Web The post Debunking the Myths About Depression and Antidepressants appeared first on Mad In America.
I fear that the American populace has been coercedby pervasive pharmaceutical marketing and academic psychiatrys obfuscations into believing a compelling but dubious tale about the nature of antidepressants.
One pharmaceutical journal berated some managed care companies for not paying for Viagra for drug-induced sexual dysfunction. However, I doubt that a pharmaceutical company would market Viagra as a treatment for depression; to do so one would have to diagnose depression as caused by an “insufficient blood supply to the genitals”!
LB Pharmaceuticals presented additional positive data from NOVA1 exploring LB-102 in patients with acutely exacerbated schizophrenia, at the 2025 Annual Congress of the Schizophrenia International Research Society.
It is a reflection of deep systemic issuessocial pressure, medical hierarchy, lack of education around mental healththat collectively push people into silent suffering and pharmaceutical dependence. It is time to ask not only how many people are receiving medication, but why so few are being offered real alternatives.
For Part 2, we will be covering reader questions on pharmaceutical marketing and issues with psychiatric treatments including psychiatric drugs and electroconvulsive therapy. Moore: The last couple of questions are related to the pharmaceutical industry. Thank you to all of you who took the time and trouble to send in your questions.
The pharmaceutical industry set out to change that mindset when they were marketing the SSRIs and SNRIs, with campaigns that told people depression was caused by a chemical imbalance. Prior to the 1990s, people generally thought of depression, in particular, as a reaction to life events.
In our 2015 book Psychiatry Under the Influence , Lisa Cosgrove and I wrote about the STAR*D scandal in depth, as it served as an example of the institutional corruption in psychiatry due to pharmaceutical interests and psychiatrys own guild interests. The 12 STAR*D authors listed a collective total of 151 ties to pharmaceutical companies.
Because the FDA requires that pharmaceutical companies submit data on all trials that will be used for regulatory approval, it is possible to examine the data from all the pivotal studies conducted rather than just the ones that end up published.
Doing so would also include allowing them to bear the potential consequences of rejecting assistance, such as legal action and social disapproval, as well as the consequences of requesting assistance, such as the potential harms of pharmaceutical interventions.
The RCTs were mostly funded by the pharmaceutical industry, and they included abrupt discontinuation of the antipsychotic drug—which causes withdrawal effects that could be mistaken for poor outcomes after discontinuation. The included RCTs have their own biases, which may account for this finding, according to the researchers.
That suit became the blueprint for the tribal opioid lawsuit that resulted in a $590m settlement in 2022 between the nation’s largest makers and distributors of opioids, including pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson, and the nation’s 574 federally recognized tribes.
It seemed then that pharmaceutical companies had discovered scientific, targeted treatments for depression, free of side effects. SSRI antidepressants and other blockbuster psychiatric drugs were released in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
Most of the studies included in the review were not designed to detect withdrawal, they involved people who had used antidepressants for a few weeks or months only and they were mostly funded by pharmaceutical companies which have little interest in conducting a thorough assessment of withdrawal.
and of course a host of pharmaceutical drugs. At the same time, people with high ACE scores are also more likely to do drug of all kindstobacco, marijuana, alcohol, opiates, mushrooms, etc., They are also more likely to be depressed. Theyre more likely to develop heart and lung diseases, cancers, and other health issues.
When medical historians say, “This particular person got an appreciable amount of money from a pharmaceutical company, in this case, Merck and Parke-Davis,” we want to know how much money it is. He wanted his friends to use this drug, he wanted his family members to use this drug. He was also a major user for an extended period.
While naturopathic doctors focus on natural therapies, their ability to prescribe pharmaceutical drugs depends on licensing, education, and state regulations. Their approach often includes herbal medicine, acupuncture, dietary counseling, and lifestyle coaching before turning to pharmaceuticals.
This chemical imbalance theory, propagated by the psychiatric establishment, is generally considered to be a marketing gimmick by those able to see through the evils of the corporate-driven pharmaceutical industry. Another explanation from psychiatry is that there is a genetic component.
‘So, it had to convince people that they had an underlying disease and needed to take the drugs for an underlying disease.’” ’” Moncrieff has been instrumental in bringing to light the issues associated with psychiatric drugs and in stating why it’s so important that people know the truth.
Avanir Pharmaceuticals released Nuedexta in 2010 to treat pseudobulbar affect: involuntary emotional outbursts due to certain neurologic conditions or brain injury. I wondered whether to recommend Nuedexta for my elderly relative with worsening Alzheimers disease and daily spontaneous crying.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content