Posts Tagged ‘antianxiety’

Psychiatric drug industry driven by wealth and stealth, not mental health

Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011

Natural News
By Monica Young
March 22, 2011

Drug company corporate websites tell us of their integrity and utmost commitment to people’s health and well-being. The American Psychiatric Association’s website begins with “Healthy Minds. Healthy Lives” and asserts the “highest ethical standards of professional conduct.” Yet a mountain of evidence points to an entirely different picture.

Most recently, thirty-eight state attorneys won a $68.5 million settlement with pharmaceutical titan AstraZeneca for unlawful marketing of antipsychotic Seroquel for unapproved use. These states also charged this company with failing to disclose the drug’s harmful side effects and concealing negative information about its safety and efficacy. “The company’s illegal practices put our most vulnerable populations at risk, including children and older patients with dementia and other debilitating diseases,” states Illinois Attorney General. U.S. sales of Seroquel brought in $5.3 billion for AstraZeneca last year.

Looking further, it’s evident that the pharmaceutical industry is fraught with fraud. For instance, the new generation of antipsychotics is the single biggest target of the False Claims Act. Every major drug company selling the drugs has either settled recent government cases for hundreds of millions of dollars or is under investigation for health care fraud.

Psychiatric drugs are notoriously high-priced. A year’s supply of one top antipsychotic is $7,000. A recent Biosocieties (scientific journal) article, entitled, “Demythologizing the high costs of pharmaceutical research,” exposes that drug companies widely exaggerate research costs to justify these prices. These companies typically cite a 2003 industry-funded study to claim a tag of over $1 billion to research and bring a drug to market. A new independent analysis indicates the figure is closer to $55 million.

Meanwhile drug company CEOs are some of the most excessively paid CEOs on Wall Street. Johnson & Johnson CEO’s publicly reported total compensation for 2009 (the last report available) was $25.6 million, including salary, bonus, stock options and other perks. This is three times the average for CEOs of S&P 500 companies and over 500 times the median American household income. His base salary was raised this year, despite an ongoing lawsuit, backed by the Department of Justice, accusing J&J of involvement in a kickback scheme to push their antipsychotic on elderly nursing home residents.

Drug manufactures spend billions yearly on marketing and advertising, far beyond what they spend on research. Billions go into direct to consumer advertising which drums a mantra to the masses: “ask your doctor if (___ medication) is right for you.” Billions are poured into marketing to doctors, including via drug sales reps – one of the most lucrative sales jobs in the U.S.

One ex-drug sales rep, Shahram Ahari, told a Senate Aging Committee that on top of a base salary for starting reps of $50,000, “there were four quarterly bonuses, an annual bonus, stock options, a car, 401k, great health benefits, and a $60,000 expense account.” He said his job involved “rewarding physicians with gifts and attention for their allegiance to your product and company despite what may be ethically appropriate.”

Another former drug sales rep and author of Confessions of an RX Drug Pusher, Gwen Olsen, says it’s all about the money. She described her hiring process. When asked why she wanted to become a pharmaceutical sales rep, she said she wanted to help people. The regional manager replied, “If that’s the case, you might want to join the Peace Corps…But if money is what motivates you, young lady, let me tell you how you can retire a millionaire.” Gwen reports that every manager she worked for said children are their biggest and most profitable expansion market.

Psychiatrists cash in big time as drug-pushers. The faster they shuffle people in and out for 15-minute medication management visits, the more they fill their deep pockets.

A recent New York Times article “Talk Therapy Doesn’t Pay, So Psychiatry Turns Instead to Drug Therapy,” gives an example of a practicing psychiatrist since 1972. He likens his office now to a bus station. In the old days of 45-minute talk sessions, “he knew his patients’ inner lives better than he knew his wife’s; now, he often cannot remember their names,” states the author. The doctor admits, “I had to train myself not to get too interested in their problems.”

And how much does the average psychiatrist make a year peddling drugs? $191,000.

Worldwide sales of antidepressants, stimulants, antianxiety and antipsychotic drugs exceed $82 billion a year. Yet for all the wealth this has brought these industries, are people truly getting better?

Psychiatric drugs have repeatedly proven to not only be extremely hazardous to one’s health but can be life-threatening and even fatal. Now the Archives of General Psychiatry has released scientific proof that antipsychotic drugs shrink brain tissue. (No wonder psychiatrists are called “shrinks”!)

Science journalist and author, Robert Whitaker, reports that long-term use of psychiatric medications is actually causing more mental illness – not less. He states “what you find with them when you look at long term outcomes, you see more people having chronic symptoms long term than you do in the unmedicated.”

Whitaker also points to disability statistics. Since the boom of psychiatric prescriptions began in 1987, adults on disability for mental illness more than tripled to 4 million. Amongst those on disability, the percentage of children has risen from about 5% in 1987 to over 50% today.

Of course the pill-pushers and their hordes of paid lobbyists, advocacy groups and spokesmen want us to believe that this means more mentally ill are finally getting the drug treatment they really need.

But who wants to believe a bunch of liars anyway?

« Return to news items


Share

Military’s drug policy threatens troops’ health, doctors say

Tuesday, January 18th, 2011

NextGov
By Bob Brewin
January 18, 2011

Army leaders are increasingly concerned about the growing use and abuse of prescription drugs by soldiers, but a Nextgov investigation shows a U.S. Central Command policy that allows troops a 90- or 180-day supply of highly addictive psychotropic drugs before they deploy to combat contributes to the problem.

The CENTCOM Central Nervous System
Drug formulary includes drugs like Valium and Xanax, used to treat depression, as well as the antipsychotic Seroquel, originally developed to treat schizophrenia, bipolar disorders, mania and depression.

Although CENTCOM policy does not permit the use of Seroquel to treat deploying troops with these conditions, it does allow its use as a sleep aid, and allows deployed troops to be provided with a 180-day supply, even though the drug has been implicated in the deaths of two Marines who died in their sleep after taking large doses of the drug.

The Army endorsed Seroquel as a sleep aid in the May 2010 report of its Pain Management Task Force, which, among other things, called for a reduction in the number of prescription drugs given to troops. An appendix to that report recommended taking Seroquel in either 25- or 50-milligram doses for sleep disorders.

A June 2010 internal report from the Defense Department’s Pharmacoeconomic Center at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio showed that 213,972, or 20 percent of the 1.1 million active-duty troops surveyed, were taking some form of psychotropic drug: antidepressants, antipsychotics, sedative hypnotics, or other controlled substances.

Dr. Grace Jackson, a former Navy psychiatrist, told Nextgov she resigned her commission in 2002 “out of conscience, because I did not want to be a pill pusher.” She believes psychotropic drugs have so many inherent dangers that “the CENTCOM CNS formulary is destroying the force,” she said.

Dr. Greg Smith, who runs the Los Angles-based Comprehensive Pain Relief Group, which treats chronic pain and prescription drug abuse through an integrative medical approach called the Nutrition, Emotional/Psychological, Social/Financial and Physical program, said he was shocked by CENTCOM’s drug policy for deployed troops. “If I was a commander I’d worry about what these troops would do,” as a result of their medications, Smith said.

Dr. Peter Breggin, an Ithaca, N.Y., psychiatrist who testified before a House Veterans Affairs Committee last September on the relationship between medication and veterans’ suicides, said flatly, “You should not send troops into combat on psychotropic drugs.” Medications on the CENTCOM CNS formulary can cause loss of judgment and self-control and could result in increased violence and suicidal impulses, Breggin said.

The Army implicated prescription drugs as contributing to suicides in a July 2010 report, which said one-third of all active-duty military suicides involved prescription drugs.

When the suicide report was released, Gen. Peter Chiarelli, the Army’s vice chief of staff, said the service needed to develop better controls for prescription drugs. “Let’s make sure when we prescribe that we put an end date on that prescription, so it doesn’t remain an open-ended opportunity for somebody to be abusing drugs,” Chiarelli said.

But when it comes to the CENTCOM CNS formulary — which for some drugs allows a 180-day supply when troops deploy, followed by a 180-day refill in theater, according to an October 2010 update to the psychotropic drug policy — neither the Army nor CENTCOM sees a need for change.

In an e-mailed statement to Nextgov, Col. John Stasinos, chief of addiction medicine for the Army surgeon general, and Col. Carol Labadie, pharmacy program manager in the Directorate of Health Policy and Services for the surgeon general, said soldiers are supplied with up to 180 days of medications because they “serve in remote areas without easy access to pharmacies. It is important that soldiers on chronic medications do not run out of them during combat operations, because not taking the medications can be as dangerous as taking too much medication.”

Abuse of prescription drugs, Stasinos and Labadie said, can be prevented by improved communication among health care providers, soldiers and commanders. Comprehensive reviews of soldiers’ medication profiles by pharmacists are another way to prevent abuse, they said.

The statement from Stasinos and Labadie added that it is possible that troops could receive a 180-day supply of more than one psychotropic medication.

Navy Lt. Cmdr. William Speaks, a CENTCOM spokesman, echoed comments from the Army. He said the drug-supply policy for deployed troops was “established to ensure personnel who required these medications had an adequate supply before deployment to last through pre-deployment activities and training as well as travel to theater and initial deployment phase.”

He added, “Some of these medications can cause duty-limiting side effects if they are withdrawn abruptly [i.e. if the individual runs out]. This policy prevents that from occurring.”

Speaks said, “Abuse is always a possibility the prescribing clinician must consider … demonstration of clinical stability, medication quantity limits and in-theater review of prescriptions reduces the potential for abuse.”

Suicide and Drug Abuse

The Army’s suicide report drew a link between a significant increase in prescription drug use among troops and the service’s rising suicide rate. It also raised serious concerns about troops trafficking in prescription drugs.

Jackson, the former Navy psychologist, now has a civilian practice in Greensboro, N.C. She said at least one drug on the CENTCOM formulary — Depakote, an anticonvulsant, which military doctors prescribe for mood control — carries serious physical risks for troops. Depakote is toxic to certain cells, including hair cells in the ears, and can lead to hearing loss. Troops in a howitzer battery who already run the risk of hearing loss should not take Depakote, she said.

The medication also can cause what she calls “cognitive toxicity,” also known as Depakote dementia, impairing a person’s ability to think and make decisions. Jackson said that while Depakote has been investigated as an adjunct therapy for cancer, its use has been limited due to the drug’s effects on cognition.

The antidepressant Wellbutrin, also on the CENTCOM formulary, likely poses a long-term risk of Parkinson’s disease, especially for older troops, said Jackson, author of Drug-Induced Dementia: A Perfect Crime (AuthorHouse, 2009).

Jackson and Breggin both expressed deep concerns about Xanax, perhaps the most addictive of all benzodiazepines, a class of depressant medications used to treat anxiety, on the CENTCOM formulary.

Breggin, author of Medication Madness: The Role of Psychiatric Drugs in Cases of Violence, Suicide and Crime (St. Martin’s Griffin, 2009), called Xanax “solid alcohol” and said all the benzodiazepines on the CENTCOM formulary “amount to a prescription for abuse.” He also said there is no rationale for prescribing multiple psychotropic drugs to troops.

Smith said he was “flabbergasted” that military doctors prescribed Seroquel as a sleep aid, as the Food and Drug Administration has not approved such a use and other drugs are more effective. Breggin agreed, calling Seroquel “very dangerous, expensive and not proven to be more beneficial than other drugs.”

Jackson noted Seroquel has the addictive potential of opioids, such heroin.

CENTCOM’s allowance of Seroquel as a sleep aid also seems to fly in the face of a high-level Defense policy set in November 2006. In a memo titled “Policy Guidance for Deployment Limiting Pyschiatric Conditions and Medications,” William Winkenwerder, then assistant secretary of Defense for health affairs, said psychotropic medications that would prohibit troops from deployment included those used to treat chronic insomnia.

Asked if prescribing Seroquel to aid sleep violated this policy, Stasinos and Labadie said in an e-mail, “Seroquel is not prescribed for chronic insomnia. Lower doses have been used to aid soldiers with troubled sleep for anxiety-related nightmares.” They added while other sleep medications are on the CENTCOM formulary, none appears to relieve nightmares as effectively as Seroquel.

Laura Woodin, a spokeswoman for the U.S. division of London-based AstraZeneca, which makes Seroquel, said the drug is not approved by the FDA as a sleep aid or to treat post-traumatic stress disorder. But, she added, mental health professionals often prescribe it to treat conditions not approved by the FDA. “Like patients, we trust doctors to use their medical judgment to determine when it is appropriate to prescribe medications,” Woodin said.

Nightmare

Stan White, a retired high school teacher who lives in the small town of Cross Lanes, W.Va., has observed the effects Seroquel can have. When his son Andrew returned from a tour in Iraq with the Marine Reserve 4th Combat Engineer Battalion in 2007, he was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and was prescribed three psychotropic drugs, including Seroquel, by the Huntington Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White said.

VA started Andrew on 25 milligrams of Seroquel a day and upped the dose to 1,600 milligrams a day (the CENTCOM-approved dose is 25 milligrams a day). Andrew White died in his sleep Feb. 12, 2008, six months after seeking help.

White said Andrew was so befuddled by his drug cocktail, which included Klonopin, a benzodiazepine, and hydrocodone, an opiate, that his wife, Shirley, had to dole them out forAndrew. White said Seroquel did not diminish Andrew’s nightmares at even such a high dosage.

While talk therapy is widely viewed as one of the most effective treatments for some mental health problems, including PTSD, White said Andrew had only a few such sessions, primarily with a local veterans’ peer therapy group. It was not until the week Andrew died that a VA psychiatrist decided to begin intensive sessions with him.

Stan White says his mission in life today is to expose the dangers of Seroquel. The drug, he said, “turns people unto zombies. I cannot imagine going into battle on Seroquel.”

MEDS AND MREs

Some of the drugs on the CENTCOM Formulary of CNS Medication Restrictions require patients to follow restricted diets, a tall order for deployed troops operating in remote areas and eating a steady round of Meals Ready to Eat field rations, according to Dr. Peter Breggin, a psychiatrist.

At least three of the antidepressant drugs on the CENTCOM formulary are monoamine oxidase inhibitors, which also exist in the intestine and help break down a substance in food know as tyramine.

MAOIs on the formulary include Marplan, Nardil and Parnate, and patients taking these drugs should avoid foods that contain significant amounts of tyramine, which interferes with the action of natural tyramine in the intestines. If not, too much of the MAOI could enter the bloodstream, which could cause a hypertensive crisis due to elevation of blood pressure.

Foods in MREs that contain tyramine include pepperoni and cheese and, among the favorite snacks, raisins and peanuts.

MAOIs also increase the amount of norepinephrine, a hormone, neurotransmitter and blood vessel constrictor, and patients taking these medications should not be prescribed other drugs that could also increase norepinephrine levels. These include amphetamines, dextroamphetamine and Ritalin, which are also on the CENTCOM formulary.

Read article here:  http://www.nextgov.com/nextgov/ng_20110118_8944.php?oref=topstory

« Return to news items


Share

Anti-Anxiety Drugs linked to brain damage 30 years ago

Sunday, November 7th, 2010

MPs and campaigners predict class action after failures to mount full-scale research into warnings left millions of patients at risk

The Independent, November 7, 2010
by Nina Lakhani

There are a growing number of claims against individual doctors for negligent prescribing benzodiazepines

There are a growing number of claims against individual doctors for negligent prescribing benzodiazepines

(note  from CCHR, benzodiazepines are also called anti-anxiety drugs and include Xanax, Klonopin, Ativan, Valium as some of the more well known brand names.)

Secret documents reveal that government-funded experts were warned nearly 30 years ago that tranquillisers that were later prescribed to millions of people could cause brain damage.

The Medical Research Council (MRC) agreed in 1982 that there should be large-scale studies to examine the long-term impact of benzodiazepines after research by a leading psychiatrist showed brain shrinkage in some patients similar to the effects of long-term alcohol abuse.

However, no such work was ever carried out into the effects of drugs such as Valium, Mogadon and Librium – and doctors went on prescribing them to patients for anxiety, stress, insomnia and muscle spasms.

MPs and lawyers described the documents as a scandal, and predicted they could lead the way to a class action costing millions. There are an estimated 1.5 million “involuntary addicts” in the UK, and scores display symptoms consistent with brain damage.

The MRC hosted a meeting of eminent experts and government representatives in 1981 after research by Malcolm Lader, now emeritus professor of the Institute of Psychiatry, showed brain shrinkage occurred in some benzodiazepine patients.

Recommendations to carry out studies to examine long-term problems associated with these drugs, which GPs prescribed more than 20 million times last year, were accepted by the MRC Neurosciences Board in January 1982.

But then the trail goes dead. The documents, which have been seen by The Independent on Sunday and were marked “closed until 2014″, do not make it clear why no work to test Professor Lader’s findings properly was ever funded. The Department of Health has no record of the meeting.

Jim Dobbin, the chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Involuntary Tranquilliser Addiction, said: “Many victims have lasting physical, cognitive and psychological problems even after they have withdrawn. We are seeking legal advice because we believe these documents are the bombshell they have been waiting for. The MRC must justify why there was no proper follow-up to Professor Lader’s research, no safety committee, no study, nothing to further explore the results. We are talking about a huge scandal here.”

Catherine Hopkins, the legal director of Action against Medical Accidents, added: “The failure to carry out research into the effect of benzodiazepines has exposed huge numbers of people to the risk of brain damage. This research urgently needs to be carried out, and if the results confirm the suspicions of the 1981 expert group, it could lead to one of the biggest group actions for damages against the Government and the MRC ever seen in the courts.”

Initially advertised as completely harmless, benzodiazepines (“benzos”) were touted as the world’s first wonder drug in the 1960s. Within a decade they became the UK’s most commonly used medication.

Current guidelines for doctors say they should be prescribed for a maximum of four weeks. But some people become “involuntarily addicted” within days, unable to stop without withdrawal symptoms such as burning sensations, distorted vision, headaches and even fatal seizures.

Some patients who have taken the pills for months or years have enduring neurological pain, headaches, cognitive impairment and memory loss. But 30 years after the MRC first considered the idea, there is no medical research to confirm whether this is down to drug-induced brain damage or not.

Professor Lader said yesterday: “The results didn’t surprise us because we already knew long-term alcohol use could cause permanent brain changes. There should have been a really good, large-scale study but I was never given the facilities or resources to do it.

“I asked to set up a unit to research benzos but they turned me down… they could have set-up a special safety committee, but they didn’t even do that. I am not going to speculate why; I was grateful for the support they did give me. There were always competing interests for the same resources, so maybe it wasn’t regarded as important enough.”

He repeated the small study and found similar, inconclusive results, but then gave up. “I was getting on with other research and didn’t want to be labelled as the person who just pushed benzos… I should have been more proactive… I assumed the prescribing would peter out, but GPs are still swinging them around like Smarties.”

The MRC has funded around 20 benzodiazepine studies since 1982, mainly in laboratory animals, but the critical questions posed by Professor Lader in 1981 remain unanswered.

Heather Ashton, emeritus professor of clinical psychopharmacology at the University of Newcastle upon Tyne, set up the first NHS withdrawal clinic in 1984. In 1995 she submitted a research proposal to the MRC to investigate the link between long-term benzodiazepine use and permanent brain damage, using sophisticated EEG and MRI scans, and cognitive testing in a randomised control trial. Her proposal was rejected.

There are a growing number of claims against individual doctors for negligent prescribing benzodiazepines. Ray Nimmo, prescribed Valium as a muscle relaxant for stomach pain in 1984, received £40,000 in an out-of-court settlement in 2002 after 12 years of addiction.

In the 1980s 17,000 claimants began a class action against the pharmaceutical manufacturers Roche Products and John Wyeth. Procedural delays, technical motions and escalating costs prevented the cases coming to trial.

A small group attempted to continue unrepresented as litigants in person but failed. The manufacturer’s total costs, £35m, were awarded, but not enforced against one of those final litigants, Michael Behan, who now works for Jim Dobbin MP.

Emma Jones, a solicitor at Leigh Day & Co, said: “We’re aware of earlier litigation against the drug companies which did not succeed. It is interesting that these documents may well have been pertinent at that time. It seems rather strange that such information was kept ‘hidden’ for so long.”

Case study

Valerie Bell, 67 from Surrey, was prescribed lorazepam in 1984 after a panic attack. She weaned herself off in 2007 but still suffers from neurological pains in her head, neck and feet. No brain scan has even been done.

“I was running two florist shops in Essex with my husband; we had a great social life, and life was generally fantastic. On yet another diet, I had a panic attack at a party one night. My doctor said there was a wonderful new drug from the US, so I took it without asking questions. I didn’t feel right straight away. The doctor said it was my illness, increased the dose and added an anti-depressant. This went on for years, new pill after new pill. Some days I couldn’t even get out of bed.

I’ve seen 32 doctors but no one has said it could be the pills; for years I believed these men in white coats and Armani suits. When I decided enough was enough, it took me 15 years to come off: five tapered withdrawals made me loopy, hearing voices, unable even to make tea. No human being should suffer like this. We lost our home and our businesses. The drugs destroyed our lives.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/drugs-linked-to-brain-damage-30-years-ago-2127504.html

« Return to news items


Share

Prescription Drug Epidemic Spreads to Babies

Friday, July 16th, 2010

St. Petersburg Times
By Richard Martin
July 16, 2010

Dr. Mary Newport sees the symptoms more and more in the babies she treats: oddly stiff limbs, severe tremors, vomiting, diarrhea, insomnia, crying that never stops.

The common denominator: Their mothers were taking prescription drugs, mostly painkillers like OxyContin and Vicodin, and antianxiety drugs like Xanax during pregnancy.

Some of the moms had no idea these medications would hurt their developing babies — after all, it’s not like it’s heroin or cocaine, many think.

“They are seriously misinformed,” said Newport, medical director of Spring Hill Regional Hospital’s neonatal intensive care unit.

The prescription drug epidemic, well documented among teens and adults, now is claiming victims before they are even born. Tampa Bay area doctors and addiction specialists are reporting a dramatic increase in the number of pregnant addicts and infants needing treatment for withdrawal from prescription drugs.

The trend is reminiscent of the “crack baby” epidemic of the 1980s, when mothers used crack cocaine during their pregnancies.

But area neonatologists say that in some ways, the current trend is worse. Some women don’t understand that prescription drugs can be dangerous during pregnancy. Others decide to stop the drugs as soon as they learn they are pregnant, causing sudden withdrawal that can lead to miscarriage.

And doctors say that treating a baby with drugs like oxycodone, methadone or Xanax in the system takes longer, and involves more medication, than treatment for heroin or cocaine.

“Babies are suffering more,” said Dr. Terri Ashmeade, medical director of Tampa General Hospital’s neonatal intensive care unit. “Withdrawal patterns seem to be worse (with prescription drugs) than what we were seeing with heroin.”

Note from CCHR Int: To see for yourself what psychiatric drug reactions for infants and babies have been reported to the U.S. FDA’s medwatch system (by doctors, pharmacists, consumers etc),  go to our decrypted Medwatch reports: Under the drop down menu for DRUG NAME/DRUG CLASS, scroll all the way down to the bottom until you see CLASS OF DRUGS such as ATYPICAL ANTIPSYCHOTICS or ANTIDEPRESSANTS or STIMULANTS and select one of those.   In the AGE RANGE drop down menu select 0-1 year old then click GENERATE REPORT.   You can do this for each class of psychiatric drug.  And consider this,   by the FDA’s own admission, only 1-10% of side effects are ever reported, so the actual side effects occurring in the general population are much higher.

Click here for Decrypted Medwatch Reports http://www.cchrint.org/psychdrugdangers/medwatch_psych_drug_adverse_reactions.php

Click her to read the rest of the article:  http://www.tampabay.com/news/health/article1109348.ece

« Return to news items


Share

CCHR Int Releases New Psychiatric Drug Search Engine—310 International Drug Regulatory Warnings & Studies & 194,000 Adverse Psychiatric Drug Reaction Reports

Monday, March 29th, 2010

By CCHR Int
March 29, 2010

Psychiatric drugs sales generate $80 billion per year with Big Pharma spending $4.7  billion per year on TV and print ads, and $1 billion per year on internet advertising.

As a result the number of people worldwide taking psychiatric drugs has skyrocketed to 100 million (20 million of them children) with documented side effects of worsening depression, mania, psychosis, violence, suicidal and homicidal ideation, birth defects, diabetes, heart attack, stroke and sudden death – to name but a few.

International drug regulatory warnings have increased by 400% in the last 10 years, yet the general public has nowhere to go to find this information online in an easy to search, concise format.

Until now.

CCHR International, the world’s leading mental health watchdog, has created a free public search engine featuring:

  • 160 psychiatric drug warnings from international drug regulatory agencies.
  • 150 drug studies from international medical journals.
  • 194,558 adverse reaction reports on psychiatric drugs filed with the FDA between 2004-2008 from doctors, pharmacists, other health care providers, consumers and lawyers.

People can search international drug regulatory warnings, or studies, or both. They can search by the brand name of a drug (such as Prozac, Zoloft, Ritalin, Seroquel) or by drug class (such as antipsychotic, stimulant, antidepressant) or by type of side effect  or by country issuing the study/warning.  All information is summarized and easy to read.

CCHR International has also decrypted the FDA’s Adverse Drug Reaction reports which include psychiatric drug side effects reported to the FDAs Medwatch program.  This lists who reported the side effect (Doctor, Pharmacist etc) the side effect of the drug and also the age range.

Any medical term that appears in the search results can be defined simply by double clicking the word, and a small bubble will appear defining the word.

No other mental health watchdog or government agency is offering this service to the public.  This is the world’s only searchable online psychiatric drug database containing all international studies, warnings and FDA adverse reaction reports on psychiatric drugs in existence.

You can try out the new Psychiatric Drug Search Engine here: http://www.cchrint.org/psychdrugdangers/

« Return to news items


Share