www.ditl.org

I just think a drug for treating depression should probably not be released if it may cause suicidal impulses.

The sad fact is that every drug for treating depression can worsen suicidal impulses.

stitch626 wrote:

I just think a drug for treating depression should probably not be released if it may cause suicidal impulses.

The sad fact is that every drug for treating depression can worsen suicidal impulses.

Then I'd suggest an alternate treatment.

Tsukiyumi wrote:I agree. I just think a drug for treating depression should probably not be released if it may cause suicidal impulses.

I won't argue the Prozac case with you because I don't disagree that it was a mistake to release it. It proves that there probably should be some changes to the way the FDA handles things. In particular that company should have been concerned that concealing a study about the drug from the FDA would result in them not being in business anymore with those making that call looking at jail time.

Regardless of our opinions on social issues, we can certainly agree on that.

What I would like to see is a real discussion about the real problem and what can be done about it. Everything proposed so far amounts to a quick fix which does nothing to change things. They'll only look good in the short term and cost a fortune in the long and in ten years we'll be right back to where we are only with a broken useless government system to fix on top of everything else.

It is neither a story nor opinion. My mom quit soon after that; she realized that Prudential couldn't care less about the people they're being paid to protect.

If you can prove it's corporate policy or a widespread goal then yes it is a story. Otherwise what you presented could have been nothing more than a gung-ho manager trying to improve his bottom line. I'm not saying it didn't happen but I'm not going to color an entire company or industry based off the hearsay of a single employee in regards to a single incident.

My Grandparents never had any trouble at all either; they were insured by Shell Oil. You have bog-standard family-plan insurance? Well, then you've been lucky, and I'm glad for your children's sake.

I don't think we've been lucky, I think we've been normal. Can you produce actual numbers in regards to people losing their health insurance or being denied claims that rightly should have been paid?

CAN BE. Doesn't mean they are. Especially not in this case.

How sure can you be about the mental state of another person?

Yes, it's probably just a massive coincidence.

I might have been, because statistically a lot of people take Prozac and don't try to kill themselves. The odds are elevated but still nothing approaching 100%.

That company in particular isn't currently profitable. R&D costs for drug companies account for a fraction of their expenditures. A lot of it goes to lobbying and marketing so they can hook people on the next generation of poison they're developing.

Which totally discounts the legions of safe, effective medicines produced and used every year. Yes, they lobby and market just like any other company. Do they lobby a lot? Yeah, but they also find themselves in the public crosshairs a lot. Do you think they'll just sit back and calmly say, "Sure guys, whatever you want to do to us go for it,"? Lobbying is like sex, without at least two people involved its not terribly productive. You dislike how they lobby? Start with getting pissed about your represenatives listening.

Tsukiyumi wrote:

stitch626 wrote:

I just think a drug for treating depression should probably not be released if it may cause suicidal impulses.

The sad fact is that every drug for treating depression can worsen suicidal impulses.

Then I'd suggest an alternate treatment.

The alternate treatment is "deal with it". Which has an even less success rate than drugs.

Tyyr wrote:...You dislike how they lobby? Start with getting pissed about your represenatives listening.

While I'm at it, I might give Everest a go. Who knows? Maybe I'll make it.

The statistics I have found show an excessive level of profits, yet they claim they can't do more to help patients. You want to defend them? Go ahead; I'm sure people could find a way to justify almost anything.

OTH, I'll quote Twain here with : "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

So, you can produce numbers, and I can produce numbers, and in the end, what matters to you is that you and people you know have been treated fairly. Good deal. It isn't the same for everyone, and especially not for the people who can't even afford insurance.

stitch626 wrote:

Tsukiyumi wrote:

stitch626 wrote:The sad fact is that every drug for treating depression can worsen suicidal impulses.

Then I'd suggest an alternate treatment.

The alternate treatment is "deal with it". Which has an even less success rate than drugs.

IDK, I saw some stuff from Humboldt county (in California) recently that would brighten anyone's day.

What "stuff"?

stitch626 wrote:What "stuff"?

Um, nothing at all...

stitch626 wrote:

I just think a drug for treating depression should probably not be released if it may cause suicidal impulses.

The sad fact is that every drug for treating depression can worsen suicidal impulses.

Hold on now, folks taking anti-depressants are already at a higher risk of suicide then the general population, so this a "correlation does not equal causation" thing.

That's actually a depressant and paranoiac agent, too, Tsu. The only real alternate treatment is either hedge voodoo, like melatonin ttherapy, or proven alternate therapies like phototherapy - but while things like phototherapy are proven to have an effect, that effect is negligible compared to drug therapy.

Tsukiyumi wrote:While I'm at it, I might give Everest a go. Who knows? Maybe I'll make it.

Knock yourself out. I find you desire for politicians to do something but your total lack of faith in them curious. If you don't want to hold your representatives accountable for listening to lobbyists why get angry about the lobbying? You're giving half the equation a pass which is incidentally the half you'd need to enact some laws to prevent the lobbyists from lobbying. If you've thrown in the towel on an issue why get mad about it?

The statistics I have found show an excessive level of profits, yet they claim they can't do more to help patients. You want to defend them? Go ahead; I'm sure people could find a way to justify almost anything.

I don't defend the drug companies. I just like to see a little fact in an argument. As for profits, again, the data I have which is the stuff submitted to the NYSE which is about as official a data as I can find says health insurance companies have profit margins between 2.5 and 4%. I don't think that's excessive. Show me where these are excessive levels of profit.

OTH, I'll quote Twain here with : "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

And Twain's right, however if you've got numbers and information on how they were obtained you have a basis to begin a rational discussion. If all you want to do is talk about how it makes you feel then there's not much to discuss.

So, you can produce numbers, and I can produce numbers,

What numbers? The Citizen link you posted was in relation to the drug companies.

and in the end, what matters to you is that you and people you know have been treated fairly. Good deal. It isn't the same for everyone, and especially not for the people who can't even afford insurance.

I'm not claiming it's the same for everyone. However I am hesitant to throw out a system that works for a great many people because it doesn't work as well for a small group. I'm hesitant to bring the government into a system when they have such a wonderful track record of improving things. I'm hesitant to politicize health care and create another Social Security type system that cannot be reformed because claiming to do anything but throw money at it will get you vilified and voted out of office. And yes, above all that I am hesitant to fuck up a system that so far has kept me and mine healthy and taken care of, I apologize for being completely human in that regard. Nothing I have yet heard come out of a politicians mouth has so far promised to be of ANY benefit to my family so yes, I'm not wild about it. I know, I'm a bad person for not jumping for joy at the thought of paying higher taxes so other people can have health care but as a guy with a wife, two kids, a third on the way, and who already has to watch the family budget like a hawk to ensure there's money for the mortgage and groceries in the same month, pardon me when I say no thanks.

Cpl Kendall wrote:Hold on now, folks taking anti-depressants are already at a higher risk of suicide then the general population, so this a "correlation does not equal causation" thing.

That's pretty much what I've been saying.

Tyyr wrote:...I know, I'm a bad person for not jumping for joy at the thought of paying higher taxes so other people can have health care but as a guy with a wife, two kids, a third on the way, and who already has to watch the family budget like a hawk to ensure there's money for the mortgage and groceries in the same month, pardon me when I say no thanks.

And in my position, I see the other side of the coin.



Personally, I couldn't care less about the whole thing. Unless they go ahead with this "individual mandate" bullsh*t.

Tsukiyumi wrote:And in my position, I see the other side of the coin.

I'm not unsympathetic and I do see your position. But reality trumps empathy.

Personally, I couldn't care less about the whole thing. Unless they go ahead with this "individual mandate" bullsh*t.

You probably should since pretty much everything proposed right now will just make the situation worse.

Tyyr wrote:

Tsukiyumi wrote:And in my position, I see the other side of the coin.

I'm not unsympathetic and I do see your position.

And I yours.

Tyyr wrote:...But reality trumps empathy.

And my reality trumps your reality. For me.

Perspective is odd that way.

Tyyr wrote:

Personally, I couldn't care less about the whole thing. Unless they go ahead with this "individual mandate" bullsh*t.

You probably should since pretty much everything proposed right now will just make the situation worse.

The way I see it, they should just drop it for now. If we aren't going to do it right, we shouldn't do it at all.