|New research using a novel approach to test for harmful drug side effects is showing that the common antidepressant paroxetine (Paxil, Seroxat) interferes with the growth of brain synapses (connection points between neurons), and thus can cause developmental neurotoxicity — which means that it harms children’s developing brains.|
Prior to this research the authors believe there were no studies that explored the consequences of long-term exposure of the developing brain to SSRIs (Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors).
As a result of this research the authors basically believe that paroxetine should not be given to pregnant women given the potential for damage to the developing brain of a fetus.
We think such damage extends far beyond the period of pregnancy, and this psychiatric drug should not be given to any child or adult.
Of course, such psychiatric drugs can only be prescribed after a diagnosis of some mental disorder. Unlike diagnoses for real medical conditions, psychiatrists do not have blood tests or any other clinical tests to ascertain the presence or absence of a mental illness — the diagnosis is purely an opinion. Thus, such diagnoses are fraudulent and abusive.
Anyone diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder has the right to full informed consent before any treatment is undertaken.
Further, if a psychiatrist asserts that your mental condition is caused by a “chemical imbalance” in the brain or is a neurobiological disorder, you have the right to ask for the lab test or other test to prove the accuracy of that diagnosis.
Safe and effective medical treatments for mental difficulties are often kept buried. The fact is, there are many medical conditions that when undetected and untreated can appear as “psychiatric symptoms.” The psychiatric pharmaceutical industry is making a killing — $84 billion per year — based on people being labeled with mental disorders that are not founded on science or medicine, but on marketing campaigns designed to sell drugs.
Because the general public has been so misled by the psychiatric and pharmaceutical industries about the actual dangers of psychotropic drugs, CCHR has created the psychiatric drug side effects search engine.
We already know that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration warns that antidepressants such as paroxetine can cause suicidal thinking and behavior in children and young adults. Overall the problems and risks associated with paroxetine appear to make it the least safe of all SSRIs.
This new research suggests it is even more harmful than originally thought. Contact your Federal and State Legislators and tell them what you think about this, and ask them to take steps to abolish government funding for psychiatric drugs.
|Psychiatry has always given the impression that cures were the rule, rather than the exception. However, the psychiatric industry itself admits it has no capacity to cure.|
Psychotropic drugging is big business — a high-income partnership between psychiatry and drug companies that has created an $80 billion industry in psychotropic drugs.
Psychiatrists tell us that the way to fix unwanted behavior is by altering brain chemistry with a pill. But unlike a mainstream medical drug like insulin, psychotropic medications have no measurable target illness to correct, and can upset the very delicate balance of chemical processes the body needs to run smoothly. Nevertheless, psychiatrists and drug companies have used these drugs to create a huge and lucrative market niche. And they’ve done this by naming more and more unwanted behaviors as “medical disorders” requiring psychiatric medication.
Thus there is a continuing need to find or create new patients to which to market new drugs, and a continuing rush to market for the latest drugs regardless of their harmful side effects.
The Risk of Side Effects
In a study of 68,730 individuals it was found that psychotropic drugs (SSRIs, mood stabilizers, antipsychotics, and benzodiazepines) are independently associated with a significantly increased risk of hip fractures and other major osteoporotic fractures.
Lead author Dr. James Bolton at the University of Manitoba says, “So physicians need to think about fracture risk as they are prescribing these medications, especially in patients who are vulnerable to fracture.”
Psychiatric Marketing Campaigns
Almost a third of drugs cleared by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration pose safety risks that are identified only after their approval. Thus we say “rush to market”; you can find hidden drug marketing campaigns practically everywhere.
Many of these marketing campaigns come from industry?funded front groups operated by psychiatrists but posing as compassionate patient support groups. Of all these programs, one of the most successful is the benevolent?sounding mental health screening campaign; it uses broad?based psychiatric screening questionnaires to diagnose common life situations such as sadness, nervousness and occasional loneliness.
Currently running is the “suicide prevention” campaign. But statistics show that there is no teenage suicide epidemic; and participants in these programs are more likely to consider suicide a solution to a problem after the screening program than before the program.
With a long and well-documented history of failure, psychiatrists and their drugs are under attack by government safety warnings, legislation, and tens of thousands of lawsuits.
Interestingly, underlying most psychiatric problems is an undiscovered and untreated physical illness. And when that is cured, so is the “mental problem.” But because of the powerful hold psychiatrists and drug companies exert over the rest of the medical field, this is rarely told to patients. To protect yourself and those you love, insist on a full and accurate consent: an accounting of all risks and benefits of the treatment recommended, of other treatments and of not doing anything at all.
“Antidepressant-induced akathisia-related homicides associated with diminishing mutations in metabolizing genes of the CYP450 family”
by Yolande Lucire and Christopher Crotty
Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Medicine, 1 August 2011
This research paper details patients who had been referred to Dr. Lucire’s practice for expert opinion or treatment. More than 120 subjects were diagnosed with akathisia [a neurotoxic psychosis often characterized by a feeling of inner restlessness and inability to stay still] or serotonin toxicity [extremely high levels of serotonin causing toxic and potentially fatal effects] after taking psychiatric drugs that had been prescribed for psychosocial distress. Akathisia has been known to be associated with suicide since the 1950s and with homicide since 1985.
They were tested for variant alleles in cytochrome P450 (CYP450) genes, which play a major role in the metabolism of all antidepressant and many other drugs, indicating ultrarapid metabolism due to allele duplications. This seems to be strongly associated with a large number of deaths from intoxication and suicide. High or fast-changing levels of psychotropic substances can cause unpredictable toxicity leading to violent behavioral effects, including akathisia. [An allele is one of two or more alternative forms of a gene that arise by mutation and are found at the same place on a chromosome.]
Psychiatric drugs are metabolized in the liver by cytochrome P450 enzymes in order to be eliminated from the body. Abnormal CYP450 metabolism, either ultrarapid and/or diminished, can lead to the drug or its metabolites reaching a toxic level in hours or days, correlating with the onset of intense dysphoria [unease or generalized dissatisfaction with life] and akathisia. A person genetically deficient in these enzymes, or who has an ultrarapid drug metabolism, or who is taking other (legal or illegal) drugs that diminish CYP450 enzyme activity, is at risk of a toxic accumulation of the drug leading to more severe side effects.
Eight of these cases had committed homicide and many more became extremely violent or suicidal while on antidepressants. Ten representative case histories involving serious violence are presented in great detail in the paper. None of the ten subjects described had any history of mental illness; none had been violent before. All recovered from akathisia after stopping the medication without assistance or supervision and, frequently, against medical advice.
Akathisia suicides and homicides, particularly when they involved children, gave rise to the first antidepressant suicide advisories by the FDA in 2004.
Personal, medical, and legal problems can arise from using psychiatric drugs and experiencing the resulting toxicity from these metabolic effects. The results presented in this paper demonstrate the grave extent to which the psychiatric industry has expanded its influence beyond its ability to cure.
As the authors state, “In all of the cases presented here, the subjects were prescribed antidepressants that failed to mitigate distress emerging from their predicaments, which encompassed psychosocial stressors such as bereavement, marital and relationship difficulties, and work-related stress. Every subject’s emotional reaction worsened while their prescribing physicians continued the “trial and error” approach, increasing from standard to higher dose and/or switching to other antidepressants, with disastrous consequences. In some cases the violence ensued from changes occasioned by withdrawal and polypharmacy. In all of these cases, the subjects were put into a state of drug-induced toxicity manifesting as akathisia, which resolved only upon discontinuation of the antidepressant drugs.”
“It is the authors’ contention that prescribing antidepressants without knowing about CYP450 genotypes is like giving blood transfusions without matching for ABO groups [the classification of human blood].”
In general, the psychiatric industry pushes psychotropic drugs without regard to these CYP450 cautions, but this is the direct result of the unscientific psychiatric diagnoses perpetrated by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) which fraudulently justifies prescribing these harmful drugs for profit in the first place.
1. Practice Full Informed Consent by asking your doctor for information about possible side effects and benefits, ways to treat side effects, and risks of other conditions, as well as information about alternative treatments.
2. If your doctor diagnoses a mental disorder and prescribes a psychiatric drug, ask to see the clinical lab tests proving the diagnosis. (There won’t be any.)
3. All treatment options should include checking for real underlying medical conditions that could cause a patient’s mental or emotional duress.
4. Write your state and federal legislators to establish rights for patients and their insurance companies to receive refunds for mental health treatment which did not achieve the promised result or improvement, or which resulted in proven harm to the individual, thereby ensuring that responsibility lies with the individual practitioner and psychiatric facility rather than the government or its agencies.
6. Patients, doctors and insurance companies should report all instances of adverse side effects from psychiatric drugs to the FDA.
7. The pernicious influence of psychiatry has wreaked havoc throughout society, especially in hospitals, educational systems and prisons. Citizens groups and responsible government officials should work together to expose and abolish psychiatry’s hidden manipulation of society for profit.
We noticed that most drug advertisements now say something like “Do not take this drug if you are allergic to it or any of its ingredients.” We wondered when this caveat started.
We have repeatedly warned about the side effects of psychiatric drugs, also called adverse reactions. Side effects are the body’s natural response to having a chemical disrupt its normal functioning. One could also say that there are no drug side effects, these adverse reactions are actually the drug’s real effects; some of these effects just happen to be unwanted.
So we were curious about how warnings of drug side effects have apparently morphed into warnings about being allergic to drugs. Was this another example of the psycho-pharmaceutical industry redefining terms to downplay the adverse reactions?
Well, what is an allergy? Allergies occur when the immune system overreacts to a foreign substance by producing antibodies which identify the substance as harmful. The word itself comes from German allergie, from Greek allos “other” + Greek ergon “work” or “action”.
We often think of an allergic reaction as from something environmental, such as inhaling pollen, which causes the immune system to reject the substance.
The experts say that the difference between an allergy and a side effect is that an allergy generally results from the immune system rejecting the substance, and a non-allergic side effect is a predictable result from some particular chemical or biological property of the substance not involving the immune system.
We get the difference, but we still see the psycho-pharmaceutical industry starting to emphasize allergic reactions over side effects in their public relations campaigns, even though allergic reactions are rare compared to side effects, reported as less than 10% of the cases.
The implication seems to be that an allergic reaction is not the drug’s fault, it’s the body’s reaction, whereas a side effect is caused by the drug. We think the distinction is moot, but is being used to downplay drug side effects and transfer the attention and blame off the drugs.
One reference says this about it: “A drug allergy occurs when your immune system mistakenly identifies a drug as a harmful substance.” Aha, a deliberate attempt to cast drugs as non-harmful.
The literature shows discussions about the difference between allergy and side effect over many years, but it’s only recently that we’ve noticed the emphasis in advertisements on allergy instead of side effect.
There are also some genetic effects that confuse the issue. An adverse reaction can also be a reaction to drugs or toxins which cannot be metabolized due to a genetic lack of cytochrome P450 enzymes.
We also remind people that the real problem is that psychiatrists fraudulently diagnose life’s problems as an “illness”, and stigmatize unwanted behavior or study problems as “diseases” so that they can prescribe drugs. Psychiatry’s stigmatizing labels, programs and treatments are harmful junk science; their diagnoses of “mental disorders” are a hoax – unscientific, fraudulent and harmful. All psychiatric treatments, not just psychiatric drugs, are dangerous.
We do suggest that people review the potential known side effects of any prescribed drugs; this is one of the cardinal precepts of Full Informed Consent.
Orilissa (generic elagolix) is a drug from AbbVie Inc. and Neurocrine Biosciences, approved by the FDA in the summer of 2018, and prescribed for women with moderate to severe endometriosis pain. Endometriosis is a chronic disease in which uterine lining tissue grows outside the uterus. The drug shuts down the hormonal cycle, stopping the monthly menstrual period. It is currently being heavily advertised, with a list price of approximately $850 per month.
It caught our attention because some of the serious side effects are suicidal thoughts, actions, or behavior, and worsening of mood.
The prescribing information advises that patients with new or worsening depression, anxiety or other mood changes should be referred to a mental health professional. We urge caution, because a psychiatrist may misdiagnose such symptoms as a mental disorder rather than a drug side effect, and prescribe harmful psychotropic drugs instead of properly handling the side effects.
Suicidal ideation and behavior, including one completed suicide, occurred in subjects treated with Orilissa in the endometriosis clinical trials. Users had a higher incidence of depression and mood changes compared to placebo. Some of the most common adverse reactions in clinical trials included anxiety, depression and mood changes.
The drug is a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, which means it blocks the receptors of certain hormones in the brain’s pituitary gland, leading to the suppression of luteinizing hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone, estradiol, and progesterone. Patients are advised to limit the duration of use because of bone loss; bone mineral density loss is greater with increasing duration of use and may not be completely reversible.
The drug is metabolized in the liver by cytochrome P450 enzymes, so a person genetically deficient in these enzymes, or who is taking other drugs that inhibit CYP450 enzymes, is at risk of a toxic accumulation of the drug leading to more severe side effects.
There does not appear to be any scientific data about exactly why suicidality and behavior changes are potential adverse reactions, but we might surmise that messing with hormones in the brain is not exactly a well-known precision science.
The major issue we see is that mood changes as a side effect from Orilissa are likely to be misdiagnosed. Since psychiatrists do not perform clinical tests and are wont to prescribe an antidepressant rather than get to the root of the problem, we want to be sure every candidate for this drug understands the issue and practices full informed consent to any psychiatric treatment.
In November 2018, the St. Louis Business Journal wrote, “The Missouri Department of Mental Health was awarded a $425,000 federal grant to fund expansion of a state project to expand access to mental health care for children.”
“The Health Resources and Services Administration recently awarded $7.9 million combined to 18 states to integrate behavioral health into pediatric primary care.”
This effort targets young children by integrating the efforts of physicians, nurse practitioners, behavioral health clinicians, community health workers, home visitors, and other health care providers to funnel children into the mental health care system.
The Child Psychiatry Access Project in Missouri provides child psychiatry phone consultation to primary care providers in several counties, with a goal of providing these services statewide by October 2020.
The U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration of the Department of Health & Human Services says, “State or regional networks of pediatric mental health teams will provide tele-consultation, training, technical assistance and care coordination for pediatric primary care providers to diagnose, treat and refer children with behavioral health conditions.”
Participating agencies are: University of Missouri School of Medicine, Behavioral Health Network, Assessment Resource Center, Behavioral Health Response, Washington University Pediatric and Adolescent Ambulatory Research Consortium, and the National Alliance for Mental Illness.
Why Do We Think This Is Bad?
No one denies that proper mental health care for children is a good thing. Unfortunately, the current state of mental health care for children is mostly prescribing them harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs for fraudulent “mental illnesses.”
Health care providers do not require informed consent from the family to call and discuss a case with these behavioral health consultants.
The trouble is that psychiatric propaganda on the subject of children has thoroughly duped well-meaning parents, teachers and politicians alike, that “normal” childhood behavior is no longer normal; that it is a mental illness. And further, that only by continuous, heavy drugging from a very early age, can the “afflicted” child possibly make it through life’s worst.
Contrary to psychiatric opinion, children are not “experimental animals,” they are human beings who have every right to expect protection, care, love and the chance to reach their full potential in life. They will only be denied this from within the verbal and chemical straitjackets that are psychiatry’s labels and drugs.
Through massive promotion and marketing campaigns, psychiatric drugs are increasingly prescribed as the panacea for life’s inevitable crises and challenges. 17 million schoolchildren worldwide have now been diagnosed with so-called mental disorders and prescribed cocaine-like stimulants and powerful antidepressants as treatments.
Teen suicides have tripled since 1960 in the United States. Today, suicide is the second leading cause of death (after car accidents) for 15 to 24 year-olds. Since the early 1990s, millions of children around the world have taken prescribed antidepressants that U.K. and U.S. authorities have now branded as suicidal agents. In September 2004, a U.S. Congressional hearing into these drugs found that not only do studies show the drugs are ineffective in children; they can drive them to suicidal behavior and hostility.
Psychiatrists are still telling governments that they can deliver the world from delinquency – at a huge cost. Psychiatry remains long on promise and short – in fact empty – on delivery.
Support legislative measures that will protect children from psychiatric interference. Write your legislators about this. In Missouri find your legislators here.
In the Health Care field, social justice often means affordable access to ethical and effective health care.
In the field of Human Rights, we defer to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948.
In Mental Health Care, we promote the Mental Health Declaration of Human Rights. All human rights organizations set forth codes by which they align their purposes and activities. The Mental Health Declaration of Human Rights articulates the guiding principles of CCHR and the standards against which human rights violations by psychiatry are relentlessly investigated and exposed. Under the banner of the Mental Health Declaration of Human Rights, tens of thousands of people around the globe have joined CCHR and taken to the streets to protest psychiatric drugging and other inhumane mental health practices.
Through stigmatizing labels, unscientific diagnoses, easy seizure commitment laws and brutal, depersonalizing “treatments,” thousands around the world suffer under psychiatry’s coercive system every day. It is a system that exemplifies human rights abuse. Modern psychiatry still has no scientific veracity and knows and admits it, but keeps up the charade for the sake of profit.
By depicting those they label mentally ill as a danger to themselves or others, psychiatrists have convinced governments and courts that depriving such individuals of their liberty, is mandatory for the safety of all concerned. Wherever psychiatry has succeeded in this campaign, extreme abuses of human rights have resulted.
One of CCHR’s primary concerns with psychiatry is its unscientific diagnostic system. Unlike medical diagnosis, psychiatrists categorize symptoms only, not disease. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM–5) published by the American Psychiatric Association is notorious for low scientific validity.
Understanding this fraudulent diagnostic premise, we can see why psychiatry and psychology, entrusted with billions of dollars to eradicate the problems of the mind, have created and perpetuated them. Their drug panaceas cause senseless acts of violence, suicide, sexual dysfunction, irreversible nervous system damage, hallucinations, apathy, irritability, anxiousness, psychosis and death. And with virtually unrestrained psychiatric drugging of so many of our schoolchildren, it is no surprise that the largest age group of murderers today are our 15–to–19–year–olds.
Drugging children with addictive, violence-causing mind-altering psychotropic drugs is the “social justice” currently being employed by the psychiatric mental health industry. The rationale is, the drugged kids will now be able to compete with children from wealthier families who attend better schools. Rutgers psychiatrist Ramesh Raghavan, formerly at Washington University in St. Louis, chillingly said, “We are effectively forcing local community psychiatrists to use the only tool at their disposal [to ‘level the playing field’ in low-income neighborhoods], which is psychotropic medicine.”
The whole basis for this “social justice” program in low-income communities—that the ADHD drugs will improve school performance of kids and “level the playing field,” so they can compete academically with children from wealthier families—this whole program is based on a lie to begin with.
Meddling with the brains of children via these chemicals constitutes criminal assault, and it’s time it was recognized for what it is.
CCHR believes that everyone has the right to full informed consent regarding psychiatric drugs and other psychiatric treatments. Find out more by clicking here.
Entrepreneur: One who organizes, manages, and assumes the risks of a business or enterprise, often with an additional connotation of far-sightedness and innovation with boldness and energy. [French, from Old French, from entreprendre to undertake; entre- between (from Latin: inter-) + prendre to take (from Latin: prehendere to grasp)]
The U.S. government funded training for substance abuse researchers in entrepreneurship at Yale, so they could learn how to get more funding for their health care startups about substance abuse.
Scholarly articles have been published about “The Psychology of Entrepreneurship“. One such study we noticed focused on industrial and organizational psychology (it has its own abbreviation, I/O); many of its key conclusions were to plead for more research in that area. We think that one of the primary goals of this kind of psychobabble is to set the stage for getting more research funds, rather than coming up with anything truly useful.
Another news article in the Washington Post “noticed that entrepreneurs seem inclined to have mental health issues.” There are any number of news reports about “the problems entrepreneurs with mental illness often face,” and “managing your mental health as an entrepreneur,” and yet again “the psychological price of entrepreneurship.”
So it seems that psychiatry and psychology have latched onto entrepreneurs as a new category of those needing “help,” a new pool of potential customers. Entrepreneurs have been targeted by the mental health industry both as a new customer pool and a new way to do business. The competition for government funding and grants to address the problems of entrepreneurship is heating up, and the psychobabble is deafening.
And, like any entrepreneur, psychiatrists are looking to the future. Since they have never been required to cure anyone, they continually come up with new disorders, new drugs, and new treatments which they can apply to new communities of potential patients.
The news is full of these “miracle” treatments — marijuana, cannabidiol, electric shock (yes, they still do this, and it is a big money-maker), MDMA (Ecstasy), trauma-informed therapy, Ketamine, cognitive-behavioral therapy, transcranial magnetic stimulation, assisted suicide (yes, this is considered a “treatment”), deep brain stimulation, involuntary commitment, vagus nerve stimulation, addiction therapy (ignoring the fact that psychiatric drugs are addictive), and one drug after another — each new one designed to combat the adverse side effects of the one before.
Not to mention the profusion of new mental health related applications for your mobile device and the startups that create these. Not to mention this recent headline: “Entrepreneur Teams Up with Leading Psychiatrist to Address Depression, Anxiety, and Suicide“. Not to mention that the producers of “Shark Tank” mandated that “all entrepreneurs meet with a psychiatrist after giving their pitch, regardless of the outcome.”
The news is devoid, however, of one thing — actual cures for mental trauma.
A study published June 12, 2018 from the University of Illinois at Chicago suggests that more than one-third (37.2%) of U.S. adults may be using prescription drugs that have the potential to cause depression or increase the risk of suicide.
[JAMA. 2018;319(22);2289-2298. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.6741]
Information about more than 26,000 adults from 2005 to 2014 was analyzed, along with more than 200 commonly prescribed drugs. However, many of these drugs are also available over the counter, so these results may underestimate the true prevalence of drugs having side effects of depression.
In other words, the use of prescription drugs, not just psychiatric drugs, that have depression or suicide as a potential adverse reaction is fairly common, and the more drugs one takes (called polypharmacy), the greater the likelihood of depression occurring as a side effect. “The likelihood of concurrent depression was most pronounced among adults concurrently using 3 or more medications with depression as a potential adverse effect, including among adults treated with antidepressants.”
Approximately 15% of adults who used three or more of these drugs concurrently experienced symptoms of depression or suicidal thoughts, compared with just 5% for those not using any of these drugs. Roughly 7.6% of adults using just one of these drugs reported a side effect of depression or suicidal thoughts during the study period, and 9% for those using two of these drugs. These results were the same whether the drugs were psychotropic or not. Depression was determined by asking nine questions related to the symptoms defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5).
“Commonly used depression screening instruments, however, do not incorporate evaluations of prescribed medications that have depression as a potential adverse effect.” In other words, so-called depression screening tests can register false positives when the person is taking one or more of roughly 200 prescription drugs.
We thought we should dig a little deeper into this phenomenon.
First, understand that there is no depression “disease”. A person can certainly have symptoms of feeling depressed, but this is not a medical condition in itself. An example of a medical condition with a symptom of depression would be a vitamin B1 (thiamine) deficiency. You don’t fix it with an antidepressant; you fix it with vitamin B1. There are hundreds of medical conditions that may have mental symptoms, just as there are hundreds of drugs that can cause or worsen these symptoms. Finding the actual causes with appropriate clinical tests and then fixing what is found is the correct way to proceed.
This leads to a topic known as CYP450, which stands for Cytochrome P450 enzymes. Cytochrome means “cellular pigment” and is a protein found in blood cells. Scientists understand these enzymes to be responsible for metabolizing almost half of all drugs currently on the market, including psychiatric drugs.
These are the major enzymes involved in drug metabolism, which is the breakdown of drugs in the liver or other organs so that they can be eliminated from the body once they have performed their function.
If these drugs are not metabolized and eliminated once they have done their work, they build up and become concentrated in the body, and then act as toxins. The possibility of harmful side effects, or adverse reactions, increases as the toxic concentration increases. The ballpark estimate is that each year 2.2 million Americans are hospitalized for adverse reactions and over 100,000 die from them.
Some people are deficient in CYP450 or have diminished capacity to metabolize these drugs, which may be a genetic or other issue. Individuals with no or poorly performing CYP450 enzymes are much more likely to suffer the side effects of prescription drugs, particularly psychiatric drugs known to have side effects of depression, violence and suicide.
These metabolic processes are immature at birth and up to three years old, and this may result in an increased risk for drug toxicity in infants and young children. Furthermore, certain drugs or certain excipients in vaccines may inhibit activation of CYP450 enzymes, again resulting in an increased risk for the accumulation of non-metabolized drugs and the resultant increase in adverse side effects such as depression, violence and suicide.
The side effects caused by a CYP450 deficiency and its subsequent failure to metabolize any one of hundreds of drugs can then be misdiagnosed as a mental illness, the patient then being prescribed more psychiatric drugs in a mistaken attempt to treat those side effects, further complicating the problems.
It is estimated that 10% of Caucasians and 7% of African Americans are Cytochrome P450 deficient.
The psychiatric and pharmaceutical industries have been aware of this phenomenon for some time, yet they have continued to push psychiatric drugs at an ever increasing rate, and the dramatic increase in symptoms of depression, suicide, and school violence is a direct result.
No one should be prescribed these types of drugs without adequate testing for a CYP450 deficiency, in order to determine their risk potential for adverse reactions. The test is not “standard of care” so one has to ask for it; but beware, they will still recommend an alternative drug if the original one cannot be easily metabolized. Better yet, stop prescribing all psychiatric drugs and find out with proper medical, clinical tests what the real problems are and treat those. Full informed consent is always indicated.
Any psychiatrist or pharmaceutical company that has knowingly withheld evidence about the relationship between CYP450 enzymes and drug side effects should be subject to both prosecution and litigation.
Medical students should be educated about these relationships.
For more information click on any of the links in this newsletter.
Every time we say “CBD” out loud we think Bidi Bidi and picture Buck Rogers’ Twiki the Robot.
But really, what is CBD, and is it harmful or helpful?
Derived from Cannabis (marijuana), CBD is one of many cannabinoids which are chemical compounds capable of binding to specific biological receptors in the brain or other sites in the body.
The theory is that when CBD binds to these brain receptors it seems to suppress or limit the immune system’s inflammatory signals.
Another cannabinoid, THC (tetrahydrocannabinol, also called “The High Causer”), is the principal psychoactive component of marijuana, and when it binds to receptors in the brain it gets you high. We also know that THC damages the immune system, yet proponents of cannabis call it a “medicinal herb.” Click here for more information about the harmful effects of this “herb.”
CBD and THC are structural isomers, which means they share the same chemical composition but their atomic arrangements differ.
The claim is that CBD, unlike THC, is not hallucinogenic. Much of the research information so far available about CBD comes from animal studies.
Although it is a cannabinoid, CBD apparently does not directly interact with the principal receptors in the brain to which THC binds, and binds to many other non-cannabinoid receptors in the brain.
Basically, the research to date is unclear on exactly how CBD works, except that we know it affects the brain. We’d call these observations mostly anecdotal — that is, people have reported on their observations and feelings, but the double-blind human clinical trials are sparse.
Animal studies have demonstrated that CBD directly activates multiple serotonin receptors in the brain, and we know that in humans at least, psychiatric drugs which mess with serotonin levels in the brain are addictive and have some disastrous side effects. The manufacturers of every psychiatric drug so far which messes with serotonin in the brain say they don’t really know how it works.
CBD, LSD, mescaline, and other hallucinogenic drugs bind to the same serotonin receptors in the brain, so calling CBD totally non-intoxicating is a bit of a stretch. We think the insistence on calling CBD “non-intoxicating” or “non-hallucinogenic” is Public Relations for “Bidi bidi, gee, we can make a bundle with this.” While the anecdotal evidence claims no hallucinogenic effect for CBD, the fact that it affects serotonin in the brain makes it less attractive as a healthy alternative. Its long-term effects are simply unknown.
Some proponents promote taking THC and CBD together. We think this is a short path to becoming a bidi bidi robot.
At higher dosages, CBD will deactivate cytochrome P450 enzymes, making it harder to metabolize certain drugs and toxins, particularly psychiatric drugs.
What about CBD oil or cream (hemp extract) applied to the skin? Is there a difference between CBD derived from hemp and CBD derived from marijuana?
CBD is legally available in the United States, but it must be derived from imported high-CBD, low-THC hemp. CBD itself is not listed under the Controlled Substances Act, so it’s legal in all 50 states provided it’s not extracted from marijuana.
A huge amount of fiber hemp is required to extract a small amount of CBD, so researchers are focused on breeding plants with more CBD and less THC just for this purpose. It is important to note that all cannabidiol products are not approved by the FDA for the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of any disease.
CBD and THC both interact with the body through a vital nerve signaling system which regulates a wide array of functions, some of which include: pain, appetite, mood, memory, immune response, and sleep. There are still very little long-term safety data available. The proponents of CBD, whether for internal or external use, ignore the fact that it messes with serotonin when making claims for its safety and usefulness, so caution is advised. There is a lot of money riding on making these substances legal and ubiquitous; any bad effects are not going to be advertised or promoted.
At present, we’d prefer not to experiment with substances that tweak the brain in ways that are not fully understood, lest we become like bidi bidi Twiki. As always, your fully informed consent for any treatment is of paramount importance.