Jump to content

Saros

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    394
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Saros last won the day on November 28 2013

Saros had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Saros's Achievements

Advanced Member

Advanced Member (5/9)

177

Reputation

  1. Effexor (and the related Pristiq) have a reputation for side effects and discontinuation symptoms. I don't believe they offer a "typical" antidepressant trial.
  2. Congrats on going public with it - a sense of shame can be a big hurdle. I think you'll find a lot of people have had similar experiences, so you're not alone in with these things. At this point, you may need a lot of patience. Finding a med (or meds) that works for you can take a lot of trial and error, and each trial and error can take months. And there are many different meds that might be apprproriate to try. You might want to check out of the zoloft subforum and see what kind of person has been helped by it, and how, but keep in mind every person iss different. If someone has been experiencing depression for years, it's going to be be more difficult to pull out of it. A good psychiatrist (if you want to be on meds) or psychologist can help you with therapy. Therapy can be just talking about things, indentifying behaviors you can add or change, modifying your expectations or perceptions, or something else. It would be great if zoloft completely turns your life around, but for many, managing depression includes a learning process that takes much more investment. Good luck for now.
  3. A good psychiatrist won't draw a dividing line of nature versus nurture between depression and the patient because firstly, he won't have any means to ultimately make that determination. Secondly, the barrier between the two is fuzzy, and they continuously and reflexively influence one another. Treatment does not necessarily depend on origin. Therapy may take some time to find an effective means to manage your symptoms. My depression is several times over determined to primarily be biological, but all my (good) doctors have nonetheless looked for psychological means to help me get by (in addition to medication). Just relate your history, your concerns, and expectations: what you want out of the doctor-patient relationship. You should have at least an hour.
  4. Big yuck. If you go the source, you may note an abundance of confusion between corollary and causative agents in Andrew's paper. Between review and experiential study. A highly-biased selection of literature from which they quote, indicating the opinion they want to publish (or the ax they mean to grind) before they've had time to state it. And "conclusions" not really supported by evidence presented. I have no doubt these are intelligent people, but the paper would not have made it out of my university graduate work group or committee. But it's published in a peer-reviewed journal, right? I don't know. "Frontiers" was created and placed online (and only online) in 2010. A manuscript writer might submit the article and a high fee, and the "journal" farms out reviewers wherever it can with minimal investment. This format is called "PAY TO PUBLISH", and is not regarded very highly by modern science departments. Is it an appropriate label? I don't know, but I have to consider it. Some other info that may have bearing on "Frontiers" (but not saying anything about the quality of Andrews' paper): http://scholarlyoa.com/2013/11/05/i-get-complaints-about-frontiers/ The fact the publisher let a biased and (in my opinion) poorly-written article through suggests a lousy review process. Which is a shame, because articles like these will inform, whether they are right or wrong. More than a grain of salt is cautioned. I would dismiss ALL of it's claims altogether, the claims on their "published" paper, and just look at the true source material, free of Andrews' interpretation. Keeping it mind it's a purposefully limited selection of the available literature.
  5. It's a single-study laboratory-developed test (by Rules/Veripsych) (not approved by the FDA) authored by people with significant financial ties to the company which stands to profit from positive results (and has financial investment). I could find no outside verification in a peer-reviewed journal. The research does not identify a "schizophrenia molecule" that distinguishes one person from another. It does not delineate between categorical "healthy" and "disease" states. It is a collection of 51 biomarkers - 20 of which were included for unclear reasons. Any predictive model will improve as you add additional variables. A model's "goodness of fit" is improved when increasing model complexity - use of additional variables has to be scientifically and statistically justified. They use the data to create an algorithim, a posteriori. An algorithim isn't a researched hypothesis that is then validated by the data. It's a decision rule used to capture and classify all the variability in a given data set. That algorithim is not included in the paper. I don't see much of the math at all. The test does not diagnose schizophrenia. According to their own (Veripsych) statements, it is an aid to the psychiatrist to diagnose schizophrenia. It generates false positives, false negatives and inconclusives. The test yields a statistical likelihood. How valuable is a statistical likelihood to a psychiatrist and patient trying to diagnose a mental health condition? That decision should also be weighed with consideration of all the potential red flags at this stage of it's development. Note the test was pulled and (as of March 2014), according to Veripsych, somewhat cryptically "needed further refinement". If google results can be believed (grain of salt), it was a few thousand dollars during initial deployment.
  6. I suppose it's a highly subjective choice. I've felt numb for many years (in varying degrees), but particulary during the last 2 to 3. I might welcome any sort of change.
  7. Only that after living with depression for so many years, it's part of how I define myself, consciously and probably unconsciously. Losing that depression feels like losing an important part of myself - without it I don't feel complete. I don't really know who I would be without depression. Redefining myself in the absence of depression sounds strange and difficult. At least, that's the sense I've gotten during a few periods of relative reprieve.
  8. Just wanted to re-iterate the issue of identity, I think it's important. When you've been depressed for years and years, it becomes part of your identity. When comtemplating the remission of depression, there may be feelings of being undefined, incomplete. My personal experience, anyway.
  9. I don't mean 'celebrate' in the literal sense. It would have been better if I had said 'indulge' - as in you freely indulge in hating things, but dismiss true love/happiness as "chemical". To me, in the OP, your willingness to engage with one emotion is contradictory with your readiness to dismiss another emotion. Your premise for dismissal applies to both. But, as you say, it was over a month ago, and maybe things have evolved a little. Glad you're not so down anymore.
  10. Some people think the tendency to isolate after or during episodes of psychic pain is a protective mechanism to hide from risk of further pain (colloquially, we put up a defensive wall). Others think it's to hide our pain (and our weakness and vunerability) from others. Could be both simultaneously. It's sometimes clear when that tendency is maladaptive. For some people getting past it might involve challenging the unconscious beliefs that underlie that tendency with real-world practice, and simultaneously teaching themselves some new behavior to replace it. Maybe a certain kind of therapist could assist with identifying and unlearning those tendencies. Or maybe it's something else. I really have no idea.
  11. However hurt and betrayed you feel, I doubt that was her intention. And while you feel you are being controlled, I would guess by her threat she feels quite out of control as well. Without going in to who is to "blame", what is justifiable behavior, and whether she's actually paranoid or not, it is clear you crossed her comfort boundaries. Whether those boundaries are defensible or not, you'll have to respect them, for your own sake as well as hers. In a similar situation I would advise my friend to let go immediately, including figuring out how to let go of personal feelings and the need to feel "equal". I imagine it will take some time. Best of luck.
  12. Continue to be supportive of her efforts to help herself. In the meantime, you may need to redefine your expectations of the relationship.
  13. For me, it's like being a corpse.
  14. I wouldn't dismiss it, but also statistical noise happens. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is what's kept a lot of parents from immunizing their children. That being said, google "fluoroquinolone antibiotics depression". Apparently carries a risk of damaging the CNS (and inducing potential psychiatric effects).
  15. No cable TV, so limited options. However, lately, 'It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia' is rebroadcast on basic around 3am. I occasionally watch it, because it sometimes really makes me feel better to see people categorically more dysfunctional and self-destructive than I am. Schadenfreude.
×
×
  • Create New...