Antidepressant Drugs. Why is the Mainstream Media an Echo Chamber for the Pharmaceutical Industry?

BBC News is promoting pharmaceutical drugs, yet again! Today, it is Antidepressant Drugs. And in doing so it is failing to provide the public with full and accurate information about these drugs.

The study they having been referring to is 'Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs for the acute treatment of adults with major depressive disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis', published in the Lancet. BBC News has featured this study throughout the day (22nd February 2018). The headlines provided  are

• The study provides 'compelling evidence' that antidepressant drugs work, and are effective.
• The arguments about the drugs "have been settled".
• This is good news for patients and clinicians.
• More people should be taking the drugs.
• One person is quoted saying that there was a stigma, a reluctance to take the drug, which was unnecessary, and that 'talking therapies' did not work for him.

All this is 'compelling evidence' that has 'settled the argument' is taken from the study, and the BBC article covering the study can be found here. Other mainstream news agencies have also covered the study in much the same way, regarding it as authoritative, and all reporting it without question or reservation. So what are the questions that should have been asked?

Who funded the study?

BBC News never asked! But the study itself provides a large list of pharmaceutical companies who paid for the study. In the 'declaration of interest' at the end of the study the companies mentioned include:

• Eli Lilly, Janssen, Meiji, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Takeda Science Foundation, LB Pharma, Lundbeck, Otsuka, TEVA, Geodon Richter, Recordati, LTS Lohmann, and Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Lilly, Lundbeck, Otsuka, SanofiAventis, Servier, Otsuka and Meiji, Yoshitomi.

It is well known (except perhaps by the mainstream media) that research funded by pharmaceutical companies routinely produces more positive and favourable results than research that is funded independently.

How effective were antidepressant drugs found to be?

BBC News never asked, although it did say that each drug was tested against "dummy pills" (or placebo). What this means is that antidepressant drugs are better than nothing! Did the drugs cure the condition? If so, in how many patients? If not, to what extent was the depression relieved?

And how effective are antidepressant drugs compared to 'talking therapies'? Other than producing one person who said that talking therapies did not help, but drugs did, the BBC did not bother to ask!

Were antidepressant drugs found to be more or less effective than herbal treatments, homeopathy, acupuncture, etc. BBC News did not ask, perhaps because they never acknowledge the existence of any of these alternative medical therapies!

What are the side effects of antidepressant drugs?

BBC News never asked and never mentioned these either. Whenever they report the benefits of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines they rarely do, and if they do they only ask conventional doctors (so called 'experts') who, of course, have no vested interest in providing their answer!

Yet the answer is well known to the conventional medical establishment because it is published in the doctor's drug bibles, the British National Formulary (BNF), MIMS and similar. These include serious withdrawal symptoms, such as nausea, vomiting, dizziness, headache, irritability, sleep disturbance, nightmares, psychosis, and seizures. In many parts of the world, including Britain, all antidepressants come with a warning about their use in children and adolescents. They also increase the risk of suicidal thinking, suicidal behaviour and violence. 

These side effects are available online on websites such as Drugs.com, Rxlist.com, and others, although the pharmaceutical industry is now buying into these too! So I have outlined the serious side effects of the many kinds of antidepressant drugs in this article.

BBC News presumably is presumably not aware of these side effects, perhaps thought that their recommendation for more people to take them should not be qualified in any way!

Why is this evidence reported when other evidence is ignored?

Other studies, including many published by the Lancet, have not been reported. Why is this? Is it because they are more critical, more questioning of the value of antidepressant drugs?

• Comparative efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants for major depressive disorder in children and adolescents: a network meta-analysis, published in August 2016.
• Most antidepressant drugs ineffective for children and teens, published in June 2016.
• Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 12 new-generation antidepressants: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis, published in February 2009.

Many similar studies are ignored by the mainstream media. So the reason for highlighting this research seems clear - it is about the rehabilitation of antidepressant drugs.

Drug Rehabilitation. How will this study be used?

The BBC article makes it clear that this is an important study for the pharmaceutical industry. Here are some of the comments that can be found in it.

• "Scientists say they have settled one of medicine's biggest debates after a huge study found that anti-depressants work". (My emphasis).
• The authors of the report ... said it showed many more people could benefit from the drugs.
• The Royal College of Psychiatrists said the study "finally puts to bed the controversy on anti-depressants". (My Emphasis).
• The lead researcher is quoted as saying "This study is the final answer to a long-standing controversy about whether anti-depressants work for depression". (My emphasis).
• A Royal College of Psychiatrists spokesperson said: "This meta-analysis finally puts to bed the controversy on anti-depressants, clearly showing that these drugs do work in lifting mood and helping most people with depression". (My emphasis).

All these statements indicate that medical science has decided that the concerns and controversy surrounding these drugs are matters no longer to be discussed. Medical science is telling us that it has given its final decision. There is to be no more examination, no more questioning. And the mainstream media will no doubt go along with this too. It has done so before!

The MMR Vaccine and the Thompson Debacle

Take-up of the MMR vaccine plummeted following links with the Autism epidemic. It was a matter of concern for the conventional medical establishment so the pharmaceutical industry funded several 'scientific' research projects in the early 2000's which determined that no such link existed. Since that time the issue has never been discussed in the mainstream media, including the BBC. It is out-of-bounds. I suspect that this study will be used in the same way - to stifle discussion, to censor information, to keep the public misinformed.

The censorship has continued. In September 2014 Dr William Thompson, one of the co-authors of one of these 'conclusive' studies, admitted that the researchers had destroyed evidence that would have led to the conclusion that there was, indeed, a link between the MMR vaccine and autism. I have blogged about this situation several times. The information regarding this situation was clear then, and it remains clear now. What Thompson revealed concerns corruption throughout the conventional medical establishment, including bogus medical science and crooked drug regulators.

 

But the information has never been published by the mainstream media.

I made a formal complaint to the BBC about their failure to report this, but was informed that it was not a matter of public concern, and that BBC editors had lots of other stories to cover!

Why do I focus on BBC News reporting?

The BBC is a public service broadcaster. It is paid for by licence fee payers. Other news organisations are funded by advertisers, and it has been calculated that the pharmaceutical industry provides as much as 70% of this advertising revenue. This not an excuse, the public have a right to full and honest information about the drugs they are prescribed. But it is a reason. The BBC has neither reason nor excuse.

Antidepressant drugs are failing, but just as with the MMR vaccine, they are highly profitable for the pharmaceutical industry. As the BBC article states,

               "There were 64.7 million prescriptions for the drugs in England in 2016 - more than double the 31 million in 2006 - but there has been a debate about how effective they are, with some trials suggesting they are no better than placebos."

Perhaps this is the only piece of honesty in the entire article, although to be fair, the BBC has engaged in the antidepressant debate in the recent past.

• The 'extreme' side-effects of antidepressants was based on a Victoria Derbyshire programme in October 2016, in which several people said their lives have been ruined by SSRI antidepressant drugs, with some users saying they made them suicidal.
• A BBC Panorama programme 'Prescription for Murder', broadcast in July 2017, which examined the link between antidepressant drugs and violent behaviour. The programme was heavily criticised for being 'irresponsible, verging on dangerous' by the conventional medical establishment.
• Earlier this month the BBC reported that "Teenage antidepressants 'doing more harm than good'", stating that the number of children under 18 being prescribed antidepressants doubled from 2,748 in 2009/10 to 5,572 in 2016.

I suspect that this research may be intended to end this critical debate - certainly as far as the conventional medical establishment is concerned, and most likely our mainstream media too. Whether the BBC will also draw back into the safety of conformity remains to be seen.

Health Freedom, Informed Consent and Patient Choice

The debate does matter. No-one should be expected to accept any form of medication or treatment without being fully aware of both the potential benefits and the possible dangers. In caving in to the conventional medical establishment over the Autism, MMR vaccine link, the mainstream media, including the BBC, has allowed parents to put their children in danger with the vaccine for the last 15 years or more.

They now have to decide if their viewers, listeners, readers and licence payers deserve to be given full and honest information about antidepressant drugs.

 

BMJ discovers truth about dangerous antidepressant drugs (But they won't be telling anyone)!

Antidepressant drugs cause harm to children and young people. But just how dangerous are they? The BMJ (British Medical Journal) has tried to find out, and the answer appears to be:

We are not sure, our doctors don't know, and we are not going to tell them, or you!

The BMJ included 70 trials in their study, involving nearly 19,000 patients. They found that the trials "had limitations in the study design, and discrepancies in reporting, which may have led to serious under-reporting of harms."

All pharmaceutical drugs are supposed to be scientifically tested for their effectiveness and safety. If depressed young people are given drugs that cause they to commit suicide, this is not very effective! If conventional medical doctors are prescribing them without realising the dangers they are not very safe.

Nor is it very scientific! What were these 'limitations' and 'discrepancies'? How was it that so-called 'scientific' trials could be so badly designed? Why did scientists misreport the data? More important, if the conventional medical establishment cannot undertake proper trials, or report accurately on what they find, how can doctors prescribe safely? And just how can patients believe what doctors are telling us?

If course, this is not just a problem with the testing of antidepressants. It is the same for every pharmaceutical drugs and vaccine.

Medical science is paid for by the pharmaceutical companies who will profit from their sale. Their profits are enhanced if they can ensure that 'scientific' studies are favourable. They sell more drugs if doctors can be convinced they are safe and effective. Patient harm does not impact on their profits. In other words, the drug companies profit from patient harm.

          "In the summary trial reports on Eli Lilly’s website, almost all deaths were noted, but all suicidal ideation events were missing, and the information on the remaining outcomes was incomplete."

So what conclusions do the BMJ come up with as a result of this study?

          "Because of the shortcomings identified, and having only partial access to appendices with no access to case report forms, the harms could not be estimated accurately ........ but in children and adolescents the risk of suicidality and aggression doubled. To elucidate the harms reliably, access to anonymised individual patient data is needed."

So, they do not have enough evidence, and it would appear that they have not got, nor are they being given access to, the information they need! The study makes it obvious that medical research has been intentionally hiding harmful side effects from doctors, thus ensuring that patients do not discover just how dangerous these antidepressants can be.

Yet the evidence of the dangers of antidepressant drugs, in particular, have been known for a long time, even if the conventional medical establishment has not acknowledged it (and conventional doctors have not been to).

Antidepressant drugs are well worth avoiding!

Anyone who is looking for treatment for depression would do well to look at alternatives to pharmaceutical drugs!

And a final word of warning, antidepressants are not the only drugs that are known to cause suicide! Click on this link to discover other pharmaceutical drugs that are known to cause suicide (although don't assume that the conventional medical establishment has accepted this yet, or that doctors have been given the information).

More false / fraudulent science promoting pharmaceutical drugs

"Paroxetine is not effective in adolescents with major depression and actually causes harm"

This simple statement is taken from the doctors online magazine, Pulse, on 18th September 2015.

What the statement hides is that this constitutes yet another example of fraudulent activity by the pharmaceutical industry, and the harm it is prepared to do to its patients in order to sell drugs.

The trial was undertaken in 2001 and came to the conclusion that paraxetine was 'safe and effective' for adolescents, and on this basis doctors have been prescribing it for the last 14 years!

The study was funded by the Big Pharma company - GlaxoSmithKline.

Now, the study and its reported findings has been 're-analysed', and it has been found that neither Paroxetine, and another drug tested in the same study, Imipramine, were not as effective as placebo. The authors concluded that

     "Neither paroxetine nor high dose imipramine showed efficacy for major depression in adolescents, and there was an increase in harms with both drugs".

The result is that after prescribing the drug for over 14 years (on the basis of a so-called 'scientific' trial), doctors are now being advised by the drug regulator, the MHRA, against prescribing SSRIs to young people as "they may be linked to increased suicide-related events".

Indeed, the Pulse article says that the 'new analysis' suggested that doctors should be cautions with all SSRI drugs, and avoid paroxetine altogether!

And that, according to Pulse, and presumably the wider conventional medical establishment, is all there is to it! The re-analysis of the study was said to be "helpful to confirm the current advice".

• No mention of the 2001 study, and why it came to a false recommendation.
• No mention about what action would be taken against the drug company, and the so-called scientists who 'got it wrong'.
• No mention of how many people have been given this drug for the last 14 years on the basis of this 'scientific' recommendation.
• No mention of how many people have been harmed by the drug during this time.
• No mention of an apology by the conventional medical profession.
• As far as I can ascertain, no mention of this fraud in any of the mainstream media.

Paroxetine is sold under more well-known trade names, including Paxil and Seroxat, that have been marketed since 1992. The drug, quite regardless of the plethora of names under which it is marketed, has been known to be dangerous since that time. It is known to increase suicide risk, and to cause birth defects. Like other SSRI drugs it can cause dizziness, headaches, blurred vision, loss of appetite, nausea, diarrhoea, constipation, somnolence, insomnia, hypomania, nervousness, paraesthesia,  dizziness, weakness, tremor, sweating and sexual dysfunction. And no doubt much more that is not yet known, or admitted.

According to the Pulse article, this re-analysis is "the first piece of work to be published in the BMJas part of an initiative called RIAT – Restoring Invisible and Abandoned Trials". What this means is that there is now considerable concern about the 'science' that underlays so many of the pharmaceutical drug trials that have taken place over recent decades. More fraud, concerning more drugs and vaccines, are clearly suspected to have taken place. Drug companies have paid for the 'science', and at least some scientists appear to have been happy to produce the results that the drug companies have wanted.

• This is cheque-book science, not real science! 
• It is not the science that seeks truth, it is the science that seeks to sell pharmaceutical drugs. 
• It is not the science that protects patients. It is the science that puts patients at risk of dangerous drugs. 
• It is science that supports Big Pharma profits.

The Epidemic Of Mental Illness

"You can judge your health by your happiness". 

Dr Edward Bach. 

Diseases that affect the brain, and reduce our mental capacity to cope with life, are becoming increasingly prevalent. Depression, for instance, is a problem that appears to be on the increase - not only in terms of numbers of people affected, but also the age at which people are now becoming affected. 

The Mental Health Foundation provides these statistics about the problem.

     * 1 in 4 British adults experience at least one diagnosable mental health problem in any one year and 1 in 6 experiences this at any given time (The Office for National Statistics Psychiatric Morbidity Report 2001).

     * It is estimated that approximately 450 million people worldwide have a mental health problem (World Health Organisation 2001).

     * Mixed anxiety and depression is the most common mental disorder in Britain, with almost 9% of people meeting criteria for diagnosis (The Office for National Statistics Psychiatric Morbidity Report 2001).

     * One in ten children between the ages of one and 15 has a mental health disorder (The Office for National Statistics Mental Health in Children and Young People in Great Britain 2005).

     * Rates of mental health problems among children increase as they reach adolescence. Disorders affect 10.4% of boys aged 5-10, rising to 12.8% of boys aged 11-15, and 5.9% of girls aged 5-10, rising to 9.65% of girls aged 11-15 (Mental Disorders more common in boys, National Statistics on Line, 2004)

     * Depression affects 1 in 5 older people living in the community and 2 in 5 living in care homes (Adults in later life with mental health problems, Mental Health Foundation, quoting Psychiatry in the Elderly (3^rd Edition), OUP 2002.

Another UK web site describes the situation like this

     * Major (or clinical) depression is a huge and growing problem. "(It is) the No.1 psychological disorder in the western world, it is growing in all communities, in all age groups, with the greatest growth being seen in the young, especially teens".

     * Major depression is the 4^th most disabling condition in the world, and 2^nd in the developed world (the biggest consumers of ConMed drugs).

     * The escalation in the problem, and the recurring episodes of depression show that "while the first line treatment of depression by antidepressants may sometimes control the symptoms, it usually does little to give sufferers depression-free lives".

     * Clinical or major depression is growing at an incredible rate.

This website makes two important points about the reasons for the depression epidemic. First, it claims that there is 10 times more major depression in people born after 1945 than in those born before. Second, it says that this increase is not due to more people telling their doctor, and that misdiagnosis and undiagnosed cases would indicate the problem is much bigger. 

     * Depressive disorders affect approximately 18.8 million American adults or about 9.5% of the U.S. population age 18 and older in a given year (including major depressive disorder, dysthymic disorder, and bipolar disorder).

     * Everyone, at some time in their life, will be affected by depression - their own or someone else's, according to Australian Government statistics (its states that depression statistics in Australia are comparable to those in the US and the UK).

     * Pre-schoolers (children under 5?) are the fastest-growing market for anti-depressants, with at least 4% - over a million children being clinically depressed.

     * The rate of increase of depression among children is an astounding 23% per year.

     * In the developed countries 15% of the population suffers severe depression.

     * 30% of women are depressed. Men's figures were previously thought to be half that of women, but new estimates are higher.

     * 5% of depressed people will commit suicide.

So is this evidence of yet another ‘epidemic’ of illness that has occurred over recent decades? Or is there something else that needs to be understood about this increase in mental illness? Whilst the statistics found on these two websites demonstrates the size of this epidemic, an important question needs to be asked. Is it a real epidemic of real disease? Or is it an epidemic that has been constructed by a health industry that has come to see Mental Health as a source of income and wealth?

Mental Illness has become a big money earner for the Big Pharma drug companies, and in recent decades there has been a rapidly increasing supply of suitably diagnosed patients who are said to have a ‘Mental Illness’ of some kind. Indeed, where individuals show no sign of disease the ConMed Establishment appears to be willing to invent new mental disorders - see ‘Invented Diseases’!

The Conventional Medical  Establishment has developed, and relies upon the theory that Mental Health problems are caused by a ‘chemical imbalance’ in the brain, and that mental illness arises when someone has low levels of Serotonin in their body (see ‘Depression’). Naturally, the Big Pharma companies have just the drugs to correct this imbalance - unproven, and unsound, as the theory might be!

The sale of Antidepressant and Antipsychotic drugs have been, and continue to be, a major source of revenue for the Big Pharma drug companies for many decades.

The ability to persuade us that we are ill, and that, as a result, we need ConMed treatment, especially Big Pharma drugs, has been one of the main reason for the rise of our drug-dominated NHS. It is more difficult to persuade someone that they have the physical symptoms of illness, but not so hard to persuade them that they are not thinking properly. 

And it has been the ability of ConMed to persuade so many people that they are ‘mad’ or ‘sad’ or ‘bad’ has certainly proven to be a lucrative ploy. Who was it who said, with amazing insight, you have to be mad to be able to live in the modern world! It is certainly true that traditional communities are less susceptible to depressive. And major depression is apparently almost unknown in the Amish society in the USA. Perhaps it also needs to be noted here that one feature of such groups, including the Amish, is that ConMed drugs are not used or approved there.

Indeed, it can also be argued, very strongly, that Big Pharma drugs can contribute to to genuine Mental Health problems. The link between mental health and suicide is often sited, on the basis that depression leads to people taking their own life. For instance, it has been estimated that 80% of suicide victims suffer from major depression. But it is equally true that most people who suffer from ‘major depression’ are taking antidepressant drugs. The question arises, therefore, about whether it is the depression, or the drugs that is causing the massive increase in suicide. It certainly means that antidepressants are not stopping people from taking their lives!

This article was originally published in "The Failure of Conventional Medicine".

Why do Mum's kill their kids?

Could this be down to ConMed drugs? This website raised the possibility that antidepressants are implicated in this violence too.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/04/28/why-do-moms-kill-their-kids.aspx

It must surely be time, now, to ban antidepressant drugs.

Antidepressants. Drugs to avoid?

The dangers of antidepressant drugs have  been know for a long time. ranging from suicide (yes, a drug for depression causes some people to commit suicide), sexual dysfunction, and much more. Now new research has indicated that drugs like Prozac thicken arteries, and can cause strokes and heart problems.

http://www.naturalnews.com/031973_Prozac_arteries.html#ixzz1IvtCfuUZ
and
http://www.wddty.com/antidepressants-cause-heart-attack-and-stroke.html

Yet doctors continue to prescribe them, in ever increasing amounts. In the UK, GPs have increased antidepressant drug use by nearly 50% in the last few years. This was announced by the BBC in its news broadcasts yesterday, on Radio and Television. Yet, as usual, the BBC did not mention these DIEs (disease inducing effects); so yet again, the British public is not informed by the mainstream media!

Many people, an increasing number, are looking for safer more effective therapies, and homeopathy is certainly one of these. See, for example, this great website, which contains several individual testaments to the efficacy of the use of homeopathy with people suffering depression.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Homeopathy-Healing-Depression-Anxiety-Suicide

But it is not just homeopathy, there are lots of alternatives to the dangers of pharmaceutical drugs. See, for example, the following website

http://www.naturalnews.com/031916_depression_remedies.html

Just with any other health condition, there are always safe, more effective treatments than pharmaceutical drugs. Unfortunately, the BBC isn't telling you this!