• Higher doses and longer term use of psychiatric drugs often mean brain changes can be deeper and longer lasting. The drugs are then often harder to come off and can have more serious adverse effects. The human brain is much more resilient than was once believed, however, and can heal and repair itself in remarkable ways.
• Neuroleptic or major tranquilizer drugs are claimed to be “anti-psychotic,” but in fact do not target psychosis or any specific symptom or mental disorder. They are tranquilizers that diminish brain functioning in general for anyone who takes them. They are even used in veterinary science to calm down animals. Many people on these drugs report that their psychotic symptoms continue, but the emotional reaction to them is lessened.
• The psychiatric use of chemicals such as Thorazine and lithium was discovered before theories of “chemical imbalance” were invented, and do not reflect any understanding of the cause.
• Newer anti-psychotic drugs called “atypicals” target a broader range of neurotransmitters, but they work in basically the same ways as older drugs. Manufacturers marketed these drugs (which are more expensive than older ones) as better and more effective with fewer side effects, and they were hailed as miracles. But as reported in the Archives of General Psychiatry, New York Times, Washington Post, and elsewhere, this has been exposed as untrue, with some companies even covering up the extent of adverse effects like diabetes and metabolic syndrome. However, because newer drugs are somewhat different, people on older drugs might feel better by switching to newer ones. This may be because dosages are often smaller, it can take longer for negative effects to show, and individuals have different expectations of different drugs.
• Sometimes people are told that adverse drug effects are due to an “allergic reaction.” This is misleading: psychiatric drug effects do not function biologically in the body the way food or pollen allergies do. Calling drug effects “allergic reactions” treats the problem like it is in the person taking the drug, not the drug’s effect itself.
• Benzodiazepene – Valium, Xanax, Ativan and Klonopin – addiction is a huge public health problem, and withdrawal can be very difficult. Use for more than 4-5 days dramatically increases risks.
• Psychiatric drugs are widely used in prisons to control inmates and in nursing homes to control the elderly.
• Sleep medication like Ambien and Halcyon can be addictive, worsen sleep over time, and cause dangerous altered states of consciousness.
• Because they work like recreational drugs, some psychiatric medications are even sold on the street to get high. Stimulants like Ritalin and sedatives like Valium are widely abused. Because of their easy availability, illegal use of psychiatric drugs, including by children, is widespread.
• The “War on Drugs” obscures the similarities between legal psychiatric drugs and illegal recreational drugs. Anti-depressant “selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRIs)” work chemically similar to slow-administered oral cocaine. Cocaine was in fact the first prescription drug marketed for “feel good” anti-depression effects, before being made illegal. Coca, the basis of cocaine, was even once an ingredient in Coca-Cola.

Source: http://theicarusproject.net/downloads/ComingOffPsychDrugsHarmReductGuide1Edonline.pdf

Related posts

• US Kids Represent Psychiatric Drug Goldmine (0)
• Two Psychiatric Drugs on FDA Watch List (0)
• Prescription Drug Use and Abuse (5)
• COMMON PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS AND THEIR EFFECTS (0)

Source: http://theicarusproject.net/downloads/ComingOffPsychDrugsHarmReductGuide1Edonline.pdf

Related posts

• US Kids Represent Psychiatric Drug Goldmine (0)
• Tegretol (0)
• Ritalin (0)
• Lustral (0)

Source: http://theicarusproject.net/downloads/ComingOffPsychDrugsHarmReductGuide1Edonline.pdf

Related posts

• Is Psychotherapy Dying? (0)
• Two Psychiatric Drugs on FDA Watch List (0)
• Suicide Rates (0)
• Psychoactive Drug (0)
• PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS: Cure or Quackery? (0)

Source: http://theicarusproject.net/downloads/ComingOffPsychDrugsHarmReductGuide1Edonline.pdf

Related posts

• US Kids Represent Psychiatric Drug Goldmine (0)

“If the body is the temple of the spirit, the brain may be seen as the inner sanctum of the body, the holiest of places. To invade, violate and injure the brain, as electroshock unfailingly does, is a crime against the
spirit and a desecration of the soul.” – Leonard Roy Frank, shock survivor, editor and writer, 1991

Electroshock appears to be increasingly prescribed as a treatment for “clinical” depression and other so-called mental disorders. Women and elderly people, particularly old women, are its chief targets–more
damning evidence of psychiatry’s sexism and ageism. In the United States during the last ten years, an estimated 100,000 people have been shocked each year. In Canada, perhaps as many as 10,000 people, again mostly women, have been electroshocked each year, but nobody knows for sure because Health and Welfare Canada and the provincial health ministries do not publish ECT statistics, some of which are available on request.

Besides, ECT statistics are notoriously inaccurate and unreliable, because collection methods differ from province to province and state to state; hospitals aren’t required to keep accurate ECT records and not all
hospitals are required to report ECT to provincial health ministries or state mental health departments.

I have discovered some recent shock statistics in Ontario which point to alarming trends:the increasing use of ECT and the targeting of women and the elderly for electroshock. Consider these statistical highlights:

1) In 1993-94, 11,360 shock treatments were administered to approximately 1,600 people in Ontario’s general, community and psychiatric hospitals – an average of seven shocks per patients. In 1994-95, 12,865 shocks were administered to over 1,500 people, a 12 per cent increase.

2) Most electroshock (over 80 per cent) in Ontario is administered in the public general hospitals, not provincial or private psychiatric hospitals.

3) Over 40 per cent of electroshock has been administered to people 60 years and older during the last five years.

4) In 1994-95, 97 elderly people, including 72 women (60 years and older), were subjected to 1,023 shocks in Ontario’s provincial psychiatric hospitals – a high average of approximately 10 shocks per patient. In
Toronto’s Queen Street Mental Health Centre, over 70 per cent of the shock patients are from its psychogeriatric unit.

5) In 1993-94, approximately 600 elderly people (60+ years) were subjected to 4,033 electroshocks in Ontario’s general and community psychiatric hospitals.

6) In the provincial psychiatric hospitals, the number and proportion of elderly people (65+ years) shocked grew from 70 (33 per cent) in 1990-91, to 82 (40 per cent) in 1993-94, to 44 per cent in 1994-95.

7) Among elderly and other ECT patients, significantly more women than men are electroshocked: two to three timnes more women than men have been electroshocked in both Canada and the United Stastes for many years.

8- During 1994-95 in the provincial psychiatric hospitals, 72 per cent of elderly shock patients (75+ years) were women, and significantly more
ECT was administered to an elderly woman than an elderly man (average 10.9 ECTs vs. 8.7 ECTs).

9) Women in their eighties and nineties have been electroshocked in general, community and provincial psychiatric hospitals in Ontario. In 1993-94, a total of 102 shocks were administered to at least 10 women of 85 years and older in general and community psychiatric hospitals. In 1994-95, at least 14 women of 80 years and older were subjected to 158 shocks in eight provincial psychiatric hospitals,an average of 11 ECTs per patient.

10) During 1994-95 in Ontario, the estimated cost of one electroshck treatment, including physicians’ fees, drugs, use of a hospital bed and nursing care, was $400. The (under) estimated total cost for all ECT that year was well over $1,000,000.

Two very common psychiatric myths state: first, that electroshock can prevent or greatly reduce the risk of suicide in people diagnosed with “clinical depression” or “bipolar affective disorder”; and second, that
electroshock is safe and effective for old and physically ill people.

The first myth was exposed at least six years ago by Dr.Donald Black and four colleagues. This study involving more than 1,000 depressed patients in Iowa found that there were no significant differences in the
suicide rate among the various groups treated with electroshock, antidepressants and no treatment. However, the higher percentage of deaths among the shock patients (85 per cent higher at two-year follow-up than the non-shock patients) clearly implicates shock as a contributing factor in their deatths (Black et al.,1989).

Regarding the second myth, Drs.David Kroessler and Barry Fogel’s longitudinal study involving sixty-five depressed patients 80 years and older found that for the ECT group, 27 per cent died within one year
following the “treatment”, but only 4 per cent of the “medicated” group died. In addition, one patient died after undergoing two ECTs. In other words, this study together with several previous ones, clearly show that
electroshock threatens people’s survival, especially if they are old and sick (Kroessler and Fogel, 1993).

Deaths related to or caused by electroshock are usually attributed to medical conditions, not reported or simply covered up in the medical-psychiatric literature. For exmple, only six or seven ECT-related
deaths in Canada have been reported in the Canadian medical-psychiatric journals during the last fifty years. No doubt a serious underestimate or cover-up. Nevertheless, respecred shock investigator and psychiatric critic, Dr. Peter Breggin, has estimated the general ECT death rate as one death for every 1,000 patients shocked, and a much higher rate of one death per 200 for elderly patients. However, in its official
shock-promoting booklet the American Psychiatric Association claims the ECt death rate from shock is !1 in 10,000″ patirents and that only “1 in 200″ patients suffer permanent memory loss (APA,1990). The Canadian
Psychiatric Association also claims there have been virtually no deaths or medical complications from electroshock in Canada, despite the fact that approximately 500 shock-related deaths and many more serious medical complications (e.g.,cardiac arrest, other serious heart problems, permanent epileptic seizures, brain damage) have been reported in the English langugage medical-literature for over 50 years since the early 1940s when electroshock was first introduced in Canada and the United States.

Together with many shock survivors and other shock critics, Peter Breggin wants electroshock banned, because psychiatrists routinely fail to warn patients about the serious risks of permanent memory loss and brain damage (a serious violation of informed consent), and because elderly, sick and frail patients are being increasingly targeted for electroshock. He explained his position in a recent phone interview with me last March:

“The escalating rate of shocking the elderly is one reason why I   have come out in recent years for a complete ban on the treatment.   The elderly are less able to defend themselves against shock
treatment, and their brains are more susceptible to devastating damage.”   (Breggin, 1996)

Leonard Roy Frank, an electroshock-insulin shock survivor living in San Francisco, shock critic, author and editor,insists that “ECB – electroconvulsive brainwashing” is a more accurate term. He agrees with
Breggin and asserts, “the studies indicate that it’s the elderly who are getting the most shock, and they’re the most vulnerable, not only physically but politically” (Frank, 1996). A 1989 report from California’s
Department of Mental Health supports Frank’s assessment; it reveals that 48 per cent of the 2,503 people shocked that year in the state were 65 years and older. Frank claims the figure is currently over 50 per cent and climbing.

Electroshocking women and elderly patients is also on the rise in England. For example, in a 1993 critique, patients’ rights advocate Alison Cobb reports that “…women are the majority of ECT patients (about 70 per
cent), half are over 65 years of age. …59 per cent of the 100 (in the study) … were aged over 65, the oldest being 92 years. Given the vulnerability of older people’s memory and cognitive abilities, this has
to be a grave cause of concern…”,(Cobb,1993).

Douglas Cameron, another outspoken shock survivor, critic and co-founder (with Diann’a Loper) of the World Association of Electroshock survivors based in Texas, is extremely critical of the alleged safety of
psychiatry’s modern shock machines, which can deliver as much as 300 to 400 volts of electricity to the brain:

“All modern day Sine Wave and Brief Pulse ECT devices are more powerful than early instruments. Modern day Brief Pulse suprathreshold devices have not proved safer than Sine Wave suprathreshold devices. Side
effects have been >convincingly identified as products of electricity. These facts warrant the elimination of all ECT machines from the marketplace” (Cameron,1994).

Since 1995, there has been growing public protest against the only shock machine in Whitehorse in The Yukon, stored in Whitehorse General Hospital. Apparently, the shock machine hasn’t zapped anybody in
Whitehorse (yet). The Second Opinion Society (SOS), the Yukon’s self-help advocacy group in Whitehorse, isn’t waiting. SOS has been organising rallies and marches against the machine.

More than fifteen years ago in Toronto’s Sunnybrook Hospital (a teaching, research and veteran’s hospital affiliated with the University of Toronto), psychiatrists Harry Karlinsky and Kenneth Shulman were
electroshocking elderly people. Most were in their 70s, some in their 80s. Karlinsky and Shulman (1984) reported having electroshocked thrity-three elderly atients (62-85 years old). At a follow-up study six months later, after having been subjected teo an average of 9 ECTs, only one-third of ther patients “were doing well”. Karlinsky and Shulman concluded that “clinically one is compelled to use ECT on an urgent or demand basis”. Compelled? In my recent phone interview with Dr.Shulman, chief psychiatrist at Sunnybrook, he said that electroshock is still administered to old people but only “from time to time, a relatively small
number.” He couldn’t say how many, but recalled the average age of his elderly shock patients is “73 or 74″. Shulman added he has “never heard” of any deths or serius medical crises from ECT at Sunnybrook or any other hospital in Canada. The ECT “mortality rate”, he added, was “similar to that for (general) anaesthesia”. He insisted that electroshock “remains an effective treatment for some debilitating and life-threatening
depressions”, and claimed the only ECT risk was “short-term memory loss”. He also asserted that electroshock is not controversial, and claimed that most patients “completely recover”. Shulman explained the use of electroshock on the elderly in these terms: “If we didn’t use ECT, these people would suffer tremendously and be at risk of dying”.

It is difficult to find any study to support the common psychiatric claim that electroshock prevents suicide or minimises the suicide risk. Further, the relapse rate from shock is over 60 per cent, which, according
to the American Psychiatric Association, still greatly minimises permanent memory loss, brain damage and death from ECT (APA,1990).

Some elderly patients have also been electroshocked at Toronto’s Clarke Institute of Psychiatry. Apparently nobody knows how many, partly because no accurate,up-to-date ECT statistics are kept at the Clarke,
according to Dr. Barry Martin, head of its ECT Unit. In a recent phone interview I had with Dr. Martin, he speculated that a total of “about 100 courses” were administered at the Clarke in 1995. Each course consists of 8-10 ECTs, at least 80-90 people were electroshocked last year. According to Dr.Martin, the main reason for shocking old people is, “severe depression that has not responded to medication” (e.g.,antidepressants).
Martin estimated the ECT death rate as “3-4 per 100,000 ECTs”, similar to that for “general anaesthesia”, and said he was “not aware” of any ECT-related deaths in Canada or anywhere else.

During a 15-month period in 1993-94, eight people died in Texas,”within two weeks of receiving electroshock”; over half were elderly patients (Smith, 1995).The Texas elderly death rate from ECT at that time was probably higher than 1 in 200.

Some very courageous shock survivors and advocacy groups are fighting back and want electroshock abolished in the United States and Canada. For example, 81-year-old Lucille Austwick successfully refused to be shocked while languishing in a Chicago nursing home a couple of years ago (Fegelman, 1995). While confined in the home, Austwick was depresseed, had stopped eating and was becoming frail, so a psychiatrist wanted to shock her. She repeatedly refused the “lifesaving:” treatment which she called
“bullshit”, and received strong legal support from the Illinois Guardianship Commission and other advocates across the United States. Last September, the Appellate Court “reversed the trial court’s ruling” which
had ordered a series of ECTs for her two years earlier.

Psychiatrists and other medical staff at St.Mary’s Hospital in Madison, Wisconsin were found to be violating the human rights of several elderly patients subjected to electroshock against their will (Oaks, 1995). Sparked by the courageous whistleblowing of psychiatric nurse Stacie Neldaughter, who was “fired after refusing to directly assist with a shock treatment”, several women shock survivors and anti-shock activists
organised a public protest outside the hospital in September 1994. In January 1995, the Wisconsin Coalition for Advocacy issued a detailed and scathing 75-page report based on its own investigations, which documented serious violations of informed consent and other rights involving at least eight elderly women patients.
In Toronto from 1983 to 1992, there have been several anti-shock protest demonstrations, particularly in front of the Clarke Institute of Psychiatry and Queen Street Mental Health Centre. Non-violent civil
disobedience (“sit-ins”) were also held in the office of at least two Ontario health ministers, organised by the Ontario Coalition to Stop Electroshock (succeeded by Resistance Against Psychiatry). During a
non-violent public demonstration against electroshock in front of the Clarke in May 1988, shock survivor Jack Wild and I were charged with “trespass” and arrested while trying to hand out alternative and accurate
shock information to patients on one ward during visiting hours. We were arrested on the ward while engaged in a non-violent sit-in, fined over $50 each and lost our court appeals (Phoenix Rising, 1998).

Unfortunately, there have been no shock cases in Canada since “Mrs.T.” in 1983 (Weitz,1994). The “Mrs.T.” case involved a young, allegedly suicidal but cxompetent women who firmly and repeatedly refused
shock while being asked to consent by both her psychiatrist and a regional review board while incarcerated in Hamilton Psychiatric Hospital. Although the case lost, “Mrs.T.” was not electroshocked. The national publicity and public outcry arising over the fact that people in Canada could still be shocked against their will led to a few important amendments in Ontario’s Mental Health Act, which now prohibits electroshock or other treatment for any person who refuses. However, electroshock can still be adminsitered against the will of an “incapable” person if he or she did not instruct a substitute decision-maker otherwise while capable. (Note: The judge’s decision in a 1997 Ontario court case involving a mother’s refusal to consent to shock for her “incapable” daughter” is pending.)

In March 1994 at a public City Hall meeting before the Toronto Mayor’s Committee on Aging (TMCA), I presented some alarming ECT statistics from the Ontario government’s Ministry of Health which showed
that a disproportionately large number of people being electroshocked in Ontario’s psychiatric facilities were elderly people (over 40 per cent) and women (over 65 per cent). In one Final Report, the Committee recommend that, “the Chair of the TMCA should be asked to write to the Minister of Health to inform her of the data on ECT and the deep concern of the TMCA about the apparent misuse of this therapy.”

There is still no law banning electroshock in Ontario, Canada or the United States for elderly people or anybody else. However, some states have outlawed shock for young children. For example, Texas has banned shock for children under 16 years old, and California banned it for children under 14. There are no such age restrictions in Canada.

I believe that electroshocking old people is elder abuse. Electroshock is a crime against humanity. It should be abolished.

[acknowledgement - My sincere thanks to Lenard Roy Frank for his valuable editorial assistance.]

Don Weitz

References

American Psychiatric Association (1990). The practice of >electroconvulsive therapy. Washington: APA.

Black,D.W., Winokur,G., Mohandoss,E., Woolson,R.F. and Nasrallah,A. (1989) “Does treatment influence mortality in depressives?” Annals of Clinical Psychiatry, 1(3), 165-173.

Breggin,P.R. personal communication in March 1996. Also see: Breggin, Toxic Psychiatry (St. Martin’s Press,1991), and Breggin, Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry (Springer Publishing Co,1997)

California Department of Mental Health (1989). Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) report. Sacramento,California.

Cameron,D.G. “ECT:sham statistics, the myth of convulsive therapy and the case for consumer misinformation”. Journal of Mind and Behaviour, 15(1-2),177-198.

Clark,R (1983) From an invited address during the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association in New York, May 1983.

Cobb,A. (1993) Safe and effective? MIND’s views on psychiatric drugs, ECT and psychosurgery. London: MIND Publications.

Fegelman,A. (1995) “Forced shock therapy faces key legal test”. Chicago Tribune, May 2, 2995.

Frank,L.R. (1991). “San Francisco puts electroshock on public trial:feature report”. The Rights Tenet, Winter 1991.

Frank,L.R. (1996) Personal communication on February 28, 1996.    Karlinsky,H. and Shulman,K. (1984). “The clinical use of electroconvulsive therapy in old age”. The Journal of American Geriatric
Society, 32, 83.

Kroessler,D. and Fogel,B.S. (1993) “Electroconvulsive therapy for major depression in the oldest old”. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 1(1),30-37.

Oaks,D. (1995) :”Zap back against forced shock”. Dendron, 36,1-5.   Phoenix Rising (October 1988). “Toronto Protesters Arrested for Trying to Distribute Shock Information”, 22-23.

Smith,M. (1995) “Eight in Texas die after shock therapy in fifteen mnonth period”. The Houston Chronicle, March 7, 1a.

Weitz,D. (1984) “Shock case: a defeat and victory”. Phoenix Rising, 4,3/4,28a-30a.

Biographical note: Don Weitz is a psychiatric survivor, antipsychiatry and antipoverty activist in Toronto. He is co-founder of the former antipsychiatry magazine Phoenix Rising, former board member of Support
Coalition International (a coalition of approximately 100 survivor and human rights advocacy organizations in 14 countries), and co-founder of the Coalition Against Psychiatric Assault (CAPA). He is also host-producer of “Antipsychiatry Radio” on CKLN (88.1FM) in Toronto. This unique program airs around 6:30pm on the last Friday every month.

Source: capa.oise.utoronto.ca/electroshocking.doc

Related posts

• Prescription Drug Use and Abuse (5)
• Prescription Drug Abuse (0)

Todd found an old bottle of painkillers that had been left over from his dad’s operation. He decided to try them. Because a doctor had prescribed the pills, Todd figured that meant they’d be OK to try.

Both Todd and Angie are taking risks, though. Prescription painkillers and other medications help lots of people live more productive lives, freeing them from the symptoms of medical conditions like depression or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). But that’s only when they’re prescribed for a particular individual to treat a specific condition.

Taking prescription drugs in a way that hasn’t been recommended by a doctor can be more dangerous than people think. In fact, it’s drug abuse. And it’s just as illegal as taking street drugs.
Why Do Some People Abuse Prescription Drugs?

Some people experiment with prescription drugs because they think they will help them have more fun, lose weight, fit in, and even study more effectively. Prescription drugs can be easier to get than street drugs: Family members or friends could have a prescription. But prescription drugs are also sometimes sold on the street like other illegal drugs. A 2006 National Survey on Drug Use and Health showed that among all youths aged 12 to 17, 6% had tried prescription drugs for recreational use in the last month.

Why? Some people think that prescription drugs are safer and less addictive than street drugs. After all, these are drugs that moms, dads, and even kid brothers and sisters use. To Angie, taking her brother’s ADHD medicine felt like a good way to keep her appetite in check. She’d heard how bad diet pills can be, and she wrongly thought that the ADHD drugs would be safer.

But prescription drugs are only safe for the individuals who actually have prescriptions for them. That’s because a doctor has examined these people and prescribed the right dose of medication for a specific medical condition. The doctor has also told them exactly how they should take the medicine, including things to avoid while taking the drug — such as drinking alcohol, smoking, or taking other medications. They also are aware of potentially dangerous side effects and can monitor patients closely for these.

Other people who try prescription drugs are like Todd. They think they’re not doing anything illegal because these drugs are prescribed by doctors. But taking drugs without a prescription — or sharing a prescription drug with friends — is actually breaking the law.
Which Drugs Are Abused?

The most commonly used prescription drugs fall into three classes:

1. Opioids
Examples: oxycodone (OxyContin), hydrocodone (Vicodin), and meperidine (Demerol)
Medical uses: Opioids are used to treat pain or relieve coughs or diarrhea.
How they work: Opioids attach to opioid receptors in the central nervous system (the brain and the spinal cord), preventing the brain from receiving pain messages.

2. Central Nervous System (CNS) Depressants
Examples: pentobarbital sodium (Nembutal), diazepam (Valium), and alprazolam (Xanax)
Medical uses: CNS depressants are used to treat anxiety, tension, panic attacks, and sleep disorders.
How they work: CNS depressants slow down brain activity by increasing the activity of a neurotransmitter called GABA. The result is a drowsy or calming effect.

3. Stimulants
Examples: methylphenidate (Ritalin) and amphetamine/dextroamphetamine (Adderall)
Medical uses: Stimulants can be used to treat narcolepsy and ADHD.
How they work: Stimulants increase brain activity, resulting in greater alertness, attention, and energy.
Over-the-Counter Drugs

Some people mistakenly think that prescription drugs are more powerful because you need a prescription for them. But it’s possible to abuse or become addicted to over-the-counter (OTC) medications, too.

For example, dextromethorphan (DXM) is found in some OTC cough medicines. When someone takes the number of teaspoons or tablets that are recommended, everything is fine. But high doses can cause problems with the senses (especially vision and hearing) and can lead to confusion, stomach pain, numbness, and even hallucinations.
What Are the Dangers of Abusing Medications?

Whether they’re using street drugs or medications, drug abusers often have trouble at school, at home, with friends, or with the law. The likelihood that someone will commit a crime, be a victim of a crime, or have an accident is higher when that person is abusing drugs — no matter whether those drugs are medications or street drugs.

Like all drug abuse, using prescription drugs for the wrong reasons has serious risks for a person’s health. This risk is higher when prescription drugs like opioids are taken with other substances like alcohol, antihistamines, and CNS depressants.

CNS depressants have risks, too. Abruptly stopping or reducing them too quickly can lead to seizures. Taking CNS depressants with other medications, such as prescription painkillers, some over-the-counter cold and allergy medications, or alcohol can slow a person’s heartbeat and breathing — and even kill.

Abusing stimulants (like some ADHD drugs) may cause heart failure or seizures. These risks are increased when stimulants are mixed with other medicines — even OTC ones like certain cold medicines. Taking too much of a stimulant can lead a person to develop a dangerously high body temperature or an irregular heartbeat. Taking several high doses over a short period of time may make a drug abuser aggressive or paranoid. Although stimulant abuse might not lead to physical dependence and withdrawal, the feelings these drugs give people can cause them to use the drugs more and more often so they become a habit that’s hard to break.

The dangers of prescription drug abuse can be made even worse if people take drugs in a way they aren’t supposed to. Ritalin may seem harmless because it’s prescribed even for little kids with ADHD. But when a person snorts or injects Ritalin, it can be serious. And because there can be many variations of the same medication, the dose of medication and how long it stays in the body can vary. The person who doesn’t have a prescription might not really know which one he or she has.

Probably the most common result of prescription drug abuse is addiction. People who abuse medications can become addicted just as easily as if they were taking street drugs. The reason many drugs have to be prescribed by a doctor is because some of them are quite addictive. That’s one of the reasons most doctors won’t usually renew a prescription unless they see the patient — they want to examine the patient to make sure he or she isn’t getting addicted.
How Do I Know if I’m Addicted?

Many different signs can point to drug addiction. The most obvious is feeling the need to have a particular drug or substance. Changes in mood, weight, or interests are other signs of drug addiction.

If you think you — or a friend — may be addicted to prescription drugs, talk to your doctor, school counselor, or nurse. They can help you get the help you need. It’s especially important for someone who is going through withdrawal from a CNS depressant to speak with a doctor or seek medical treatment. Withdrawal can be dangerous when it’s not monitored.

If someone has become addicted to prescription drugs, there are several kinds of treatment, depending on individual needs and the type of drug used. The two main categories of drug addiction treatment are behavioral and pharmacological.

Behavioral treatments teach people how to function without drugs — handling cravings, avoiding drugs and situations that could lead to drug use, and preventing and handling relapses. Pharmacological treatments involve giving patients a special type of medication to help them overcome withdrawal symptoms and drug cravings.
Tips for Taking Prescription Medication

What if a doctor prescribed a medication for you and you’re worried about becoming addicted? If you’re taking the medicine the way your doctor told you to, you can relax: Doctors know how much medication to prescribe so that it’s just enough for you. In the correct amount, the drug will relieve your symptoms without making you addicted.

If a doctor prescribes a pain medication, stimulant, or CNS depressant, follow the directions exactly. Here are some other ways to protect yourself:
Keep all doctor’s appointments. Your doctor will want you to visit often so he or she can monitor how well the medication is working for you and adjust the dose or change the medication as needed. Some medications must be stopped or changed after a while so that the person doesn’t become addicted.
Make a note of the effects the drug has on your body and emotions, especially in the first few days as your body gets used to it. Tell your doctor about these.
Keep any information your pharmacist gives you about any drugs or activities you should steer clear of while taking your prescription. Reread it often to remind yourself of what you should avoid. If the information is too long or complicated, ask a parent or your pharmacist to give you the highlights.
Don’t increase or decrease the dose of your medication without checking with your doctor’s office first — no matter how you’re feeling.

Finally, never use someone else’s prescription. And don’t allow a friend to use yours. Not only are you putting your friend at risk, but you could suffer, too: Pharmacists won’t refill a prescription if a medication has been used up before it should be. And if you’re found giving medication to someone else, it’s considered a crime and you could find yourself in court.
Reviewed by: Michele Van Vranken, MD
Date reviewed: November 2007

Source: http://kidshealth.org/teen/drug_alcohol/drugs/prescription_drug_abuse.html

Related posts

• Prescription Drug Use and Abuse (5)
• ELECTROSHOCKING ELDERLY PEOPLE: ANOTHER PSYCHIATRIC ABUSE (4)

Abilify, Adapin, Adderall, Alepam, Alertec, Aloperidin, Alplax, Alprax, Alprazolam, Alviz, Alzolam, Amantadine, Ambien, Amisulpride, Amitriptyline, Amoxapine, Anafranil, Anatensol, Ansial, Ansiced, Antabus, Antabuse, Antideprin, Anxiron, Apo-Alpraz, Apo-Primidone, Apo-Sertral, Aponal, Apozepam, Aripiprazole, Aropax, Artane, Asendin, Asendis, Asentra, Ativan, Atomoxetine, Aurorix, Aventyl, Axoren
B

Beneficat, Bimaran, Bioperidolo, Biston, Brotopon, Bespar, Bupropion, Buspar, Buspimen, Buspinol, Buspirone, Buspisal
C

Calepsin, Calcium carbonate, Calcium carbimide, Calmax, Carbamazepine, Carbatrol, Carbolith, Celexa, Chlordiazepoxide, Chlorpromazine, Cibalith-S, Cipralex, Citalopram, Clomipramine, Clonazepam, Clozapine, Clozaril, Concerta, Constan, Convulex, Cylert
D

Dalmane, Dapotum, Defanyl, Demolox, Depakene, Depakote, Deprax, Deprilept, Deroxat, Desipramine, Desirel, Desoxyn, Desyrel, Dexedrine, Dextroamphetamine, Dextrostat, Diapam, Diazepam, Dilantin, Disulfiram, Divalproex, Dogmatil, Doxepin, Dozic, Duralith
E

Edronax, Efectin, Effexor (Efexor), Eglonyl, Einalon S, Elavil, Endep, Epanutin, Epitol, Equetro, Escitalopram, Eskalith, Eskazinyl, Eskazine, Etrafon, Eukystol
F

Faverin, Fazaclo, Fevarin, Finlepsin, Fludecate, Flunanthate, Fluoxetine, Fluphenazine, Flurazepam, Fluvoxamine, Focalin
G

Geodon, Gladem
H

Halcion, Halomonth, Haldol, Haloperidol, Halosten
I

Imipramine, Imovane
J

Janimine, Jatroneural
K

Kalma, Keselan, Klonopin
L

Lamotrigine, Largactil, Levomepromazine, Levoprome, Leponex, Lexapro, Libritabs, Librium, Linton, Liskantin, Lithane, Lithium, Lithizine, Lithobid, Lithonate, Lithotabs, Lorazepam, Loxapac, Loxapine, Loxitane, Ludiomil, Lunesta, Lustral, Luvox, Lyogen, Lecital
M

Manegan, Manerix, Maprotiline, Mellaril, Melleretten, Melleril, Meresa, Mesoridazine, Metadate, Methamphetamine, Methotrimeprazine, Methylin, Methylphenidate, Minitran, Moclobemide, Modafinil, Modalina, Modecate, Moditen, Molipaxin, Moxadil, Murelax, Myidone, Mylepsinum, Mysoline
N

Nardil, Narol, Navane, Nefazodone, Neoperidol, Norebox, Normison, Norpramine, Nortriptyline, Novodorm
O

Olanzapine, Omca, Orap, Oxazepam
P

Pamelor, Parnate, Paroxetine, Paxil, Peluces, Pemoline, Permitil, Perphenazine, Pertofrane, Phenelzine, Phenytoin, Pimozide, Piportil, Pipotiazine, Pragmarel, Primidone, Prolift, Prolixin, Protriptyline, Provigil, Prozac, Prysoline, Psymion
Q

Quetiapine
R

Ralozam, Reboxetine, Resimatil, Restoril, Restyl, Rhotrimine, Risperdal, Risperidone, Rispolept, Ritalin, Rivotril, Rubifen
S

Sediten, Seduxen, Selecten, Serax, Serenace, Serepax, Serenase, Serentil, Seresta, Serlain, Serlift, Seroquel, Seroxat, Sertan, Sertraline, Serzone, Sevinol, Sideril, Sigaperidol, Sinequan, Sinqualone, Sinquan, Sirtal, Solanax, Solian, Solvex, Songar, Stazepin, Stelazine, Stilnox, Stimuloton, Strattera, Sulpiride, Sulpiride Ratiopharm, Sulpiride Neurazpharm, Surmontil, Symbyax, Symmetrel
T

Tafil, Tavor, Taxagon, Tegretol, Telesmin, Temazepam, Temesta, Temposil, Terfluzine, Thioridazine, Thiothixene, Thombran, Thorazine, Timonil, Tofranil, Trancin, Tranax, Trankimazin, Tranquinal, Tranylcypromine, Trazalon, Trazodone, Trazonil, Trialodine, Triazolam, Trifluoperazine, Trihexane, Trihexyphenidyl, Trilafon, Trimipramine, Triptil, Trittico, Tryptanol
U
V

Valium, Valproate, Valproic acid, Valrelease, Venlafaxine, Vestra, Vigicer, Vivactil
W

Wellbutrin
X

Xanax, Xanor, Xydep
Z

Zamhexal, Zeldox, Zimovane, Zispin, Ziprasidone, Zolarem, Zoldac, Zoloft, Zolpidem, Zonalon, Zopiclone, Zydis, Zyprexa

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_psychiatric_medications

Related posts

• What You Should Know About Psychiatry and Psychiatric Drugs (1)
• COMMON PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS AND THEIR EFFECTS (0)

Because psychoactive substances bring about subjective changes in consciousness and mood that the user may find pleasant (e.g. euphoria) or advantageous (e.g. increased alertness), many psychoactive substances are abused, that is, used excessively, despite risks or negative consequences. With sustained use of some substances, physical dependence may develop, making the cycle of abuse even more difficult to interrupt. Drug rehabilitation can involve a combination of psychotherapy, support groups and even other psychoactive substances to break the cycle of dependency.

In part because of this potential for abuse and dependency, the ethics of drug use are the subject of a continuing philosophical debate. Many governments worldwide have placed restrictions on drug production and sales in an attempt to decrease drug abuse.

History

Drug use is a practice that dates to prehistoric times. There is archaeological evidence of the use of psychoactive substances dating back at least 10,000 years, and historical evidence of cultural use over the past 5,000 years.[1] While medicinal use seems to have played a very large role, it has been suggested that the urge to alter one’s consciousness is as primary as the drive to satiate thirst, hunger or sexual desire.[2] Others suggest that marketing, availability or the pressures of modern life are why humans use so many psychoactives in their daily lives. However, the long history of drug use and even children’s desire for spinning, swinging, or sliding indicates that the drive to alter one’s state of mind is universal.[3]

This relationship is not limited to humans. A number of animals consume different psychoactive plants, animals, berries and even fermented fruit, becoming intoxicated, such as cats after consuming catnip. Traditional legends of sacred plants often contain references to animals that introduced humankind to their use.[4] Biology suggests an evolutionary connection between psychoactive plants and animals, as to why these chemicals and their receptors exist within the nervous system.[5]

The 20th century has seen governments initially responding to many drugs by banning them and making their use, supply or trade a criminal offense. A notable example of this is the Prohibition era in the United States, where alcohol was made illegal for 13 years. However, many governments have concluded that illicit drug use cannot be sufficiently stopped through criminalization. In some countries, there has been a move toward harm reduction by health services, where the use of illicit drugs is neither condoned nor promoted, but services and support are provided to ensure users have the negative effects of their illicit drug use minimized. This can go hand-in-hand with supply reduction strategies by law-enforcement agencies.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoactive_drug

Related posts

• Is Psychotherapy Dying? (0)
• How Do Psychiatric Drugs Work? (0)

Antipsychotics can be classified by their structure but can also be distinguished by their pharmacology, their action at receptors, and by their clinical properties. Typical (also called conventional) antipsychotics act primarily at dopamine receptors. Atypical antipsychotics act on other receptors as well as dopamine, and are less likely than typical antipsychotics to cause movement disorders as a side effect. The following are atypical antipsychotics are licensed in the UK: amisulpiride (brand name Solian), aripiprazole (Abilify), clozapine (Clozaril), olanzapine (Zyprexa), quetiapine (Seroquel), risperidone (Risperdal) and zotepine (Zoleptil).

As with all effective medicines antipsychotics can produce side effect in some individuals. The most common side effects include movement disorders that may resemble Parkinson’s disease (referred to as extrapyramidal effects, anticholinergic effects such as dry mouth, feelings of dizziness or light headedness, constipation and blurred vision (so called as they are due to the action of these drugs on cholinergic receptors in the brain and body) and weight gain.

It is important to appreciate that this is not a comprehensive list of the possible side effects of antipsychotics. Full guidance on prescribing and use, including possible side effects, of antipsychotics is provided in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) for health professionals and the patient information leaflet (PIL) that should accompany the medicine.

More recently concerns have arisen that patients receiving risperidone and olanzapine in dementia were at an increased risk of stroke compared with patients receiving placebo (dummy pill) and that the balance of risks and benefits was considered to be unfavourable in the dementia population. Atypical antipsychotics are not authorised for the treatment of dementia related psychosis and/or behaviour disturbances. Prescribers were informed of this risk and advised to review the treatment of all patients receiving atypical antipsychotics in dementia as the risk of stroke for other atypical antipsychotics could not be excluded:
Source: http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Safetyinformation/Generalsafetyinformationandadvice/Product-specificinformationandadvice/Antipsychoticdrugs/index.htm

Related posts

• Cymbalta – duloxetine HCl (0)
• Zyprexa (Olanzapine) (0)
• US Kids Represent Psychiatric Drug Goldmine (0)
• Tegretol (0)
• Antidepressant Drugs (0)