Over 20% of Americans on Drugs for Anxiety and Depression

Article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/data-shows-more-than-20-percent-of-us-adults-taking-drug-for-psychiatric-behavioral-disorders/2011/11/16/gIQAvDXoRN_story.html

 

Excerpts:

 

More than 20 percent of American adults took at least one drug for conditions like anxiety and depression in 2010, according to an analysis of prescription data, including more than one in four women

 

There has been a significant uptick in the use of medications to treat a variety of mental health problems; what is not as clear is if more people — especially women, are actually developing psychological disorders that require treatment, or if they are more willing to seek out help and clinicians are better at diagnosing these conditions than they once were,” said Dr. David Muzina, a psychiatrist and national practice leader of Medco’s Neuroscience Therapeutic Resource Center.

 

The Bottom Line:

 

Pharmaceutical companies have also sought and received approvals to market their drugs to larger groups of people

So does the 20% apply to Psychiatrists as well?  According to the AMA there were 45,615 Psychiatrists in 2003. This would put the theoretical number of prescribing Psychiatrists who have taken or are taking psychiatric drugs at just over 9100.  Is this ethical and does it not violate the Professional standard of care?

 

Christopher

More than 20 percent of American adults took at least one drug for conditions like anxiety and depression in 2010

 

I'm so ashamed to be part of that group (although the drugs were given for a different reason). I'll be glad when they refer to 2011, a year when I was drug free .

 

There has been a significant uptick in the use of medications to treat a variety of mental health problems; what is not as clear is if more people — especially women, are actually developing psychological disorders that require treatment, or if they are more willing to seek out help and clinicians are better at diagnosing these conditions than they once were

 

When will they acknowledge the emotions are not disorders to be diagnosed. If they never acknowledge this, then obviously 100% of people are in need of a diagnosis and treatment. And when did "better" equate to more often.

Here is another version complete with fancy charts and celebrity gossip:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2062634/One-American-women-medication-mental-disorder.html

 

Recovered, I agree with you.  Psychiatry all too often trumps psychology.  1 in 5 people have a condition that needs medication? But only in America right?   

 

Christopher

Article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/data-shows-more-than-20-percent-of-us-adults-taking-drug-for-psychiatric-behavioral-disorders/2011/11/16/gIQAvDXoRN_story.html

..........what is not as clear is if more people — especially women, are actually developing psychological disorders that require treatment........

 

......... or if they are more willing to seek out help and clinicians are better at diagnosing these conditions than they once were,” said Dr. David Muzina, a psychiatrist..........

Only a psychiatrist would say this. More people may be developing psychological disorders that require treatment.

 

Clinicians may be better at diagnosing than they once were.

 

Clinicians may be better at diagnosing, as are housewives, students, teachers and my sales clerk at Wal-mart.... As well as diagnosing each other, we're also getting better at diagnosing ourselves, this met with approval by professionals in that "field". 

 

As a society with the help of those like Muzina and the DSM, we've all gotten better identifying and slotting the many variables as to this once baffling thing  we use to naively call "human emotion."

 

"Word" Christopher and Recover.

unbelievable!

And our elected officials are JUST FINE with this.

Conspiracy

Fraud

Assault

treason

Manslaughter

 

WHERE IS ANY DAMM CIVIL SUIT ? (at least) :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff:

i know n sad,, something had to get us through the bush years,, yikes.

 

ccg

i guess one thing worse than benzo w/d is being on benzos.  it's nuts

hi christopher sweeite

From the Psychiatric Times:

 

Antidepressant Use Has Gone Crazy: Bad News From the CDC

 

 

 

By Allen Frances, MD | October 28, 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

 

A new CDC study based on a large survey of the general population reveals the following alarming results:

 

•Rates of antidepressant use continue to escalate- a remarkable 11% of the general population now takes an antidepressant. Antidepressants are now the third most prescribed class of medications in the US- and are first in the18 to 44 age group. Rates of antidepressant use have increased an astounding 400% in just 15 years.

 

•Far too often, the wrong people are on antidepressants, and the right people aren’t taking them. Just one third of severely depressed people who really need the medication are taking it, while more than two thirds on antidepressants are not currently depressed.

 

•Since the placebo response rate for mild depression approaches 50%, it seems obvious that many people are using antidepressants as placebos- incurring their side effects and costs without any real benefit from the active ingredient in the pill.

 

•Many people probably stay on antidepressants for too long. More than 60% have been taking them for more than two years and 14% for more than 10 years. Of course, people with chronic or severe depressive illness require long -term maintenance care. But the sharp escalation of antidepressant use in those with mild or nonexistent disorder suggests that much of the prolonged use is unnecessary and placebo driven.

 

•Antidepressants are often prescribed loosely. Fewer than one third of antidepressant users have consulted a mental health professional in the past year. Most of the prescriptions are written by primary care doctors, with little training in psychiatric diagnosis and treatment, after very brief visits and under the influence of drug salesmanship.

 

How did we get into this mess? There is no mystery. The massive overuse of antidepressants (and also antipsychotics) began about fifteen years ago when drug companies in the US were given a precious and unprecedented privilege- one that is appropriately denied them in the rest of the world. They were suddenly free to advertise directly to their potential customers on TV, in magazines, and on the Internet. The companies also aggressively built up their marketing to doctors, especially primary care physicians who were “educated” into the notion that depression was being frequently missed in their practices and that it is a simple “chemical imbalance” easily corrected by a pill. The consequent casual medicalization of normality mislabeled as sick many people with nothing more than the expectable symptoms of everyday life.

 

The results were entirely predictable. The drug companies have made huge profits peddling unneeded pills prescribed mostly by untrained primary care physicians to patients who are misled into wanting medication by a campaign of false advertising that suggests pills are necessary to deal with life problems that really aren’t depression or a chemical imbalance after all and then the placebo effect turns many into long term true believers who loyal customers for life. Giving drug companies the undeserved and much abused freedom to advertise has resulted in huge waste and misallocation of resources, to say nothing of unnecessary side effects.

 

What are the clear implications for the future? We need to do a much better job of getting antidepressants to the people who really need them and to reduce their wild misuse in those who really don’t. Direct to consumer advertising should be outlawed- just as it is in the rest of the world. Primary care doctors need to be re-educated and refocused toward spotting severe depression and away from their loose prescription habits. The public must be re-educated away from the notion that all of life’s inevitable sadnesses require medication and toward the realization that most of a pill’s magic for mild depression is placebo effect.

 

What are the implications for patients? Most important—if you are clearly and persistently depressed and are not taking medication, you should consult a mental health professional—and the sooner the better. Medicine and psychotherapy can be a big help and it makes no sense to continue suffering on your own. On the other hand, if you have been taking antidepressants for a mild depression or for a depression that is now better, this is a good time to re-evaluate whether you need to continue. But don’t do this on your own. You may run into problems of recurrence or medication withdrawal effects. So consult a mental health clinician to discuss whether medication is still necessary and if not how best to gradually discontinue it.

 

The prescription of antidepressants is increasingly out of control because it is being controlled by drug companies who profit from it being out of control. The pushback can come only from government regulation that better controls misleading marketing and reeducating physicians and the public to help unlearn the lessons previously taught by drug companies.

 

DSM-5 is a step in just the wrong direction. It is proposing several changes that will further increase inappropriate antidepressant use. These include: medicalizing grief, reducing the threshold for generalized anxiety disorder, and introducing new and highly questionable disorders for mixed anxiety/depression and binge eating. It is time to roll back, not expand, the reach of psychiatric diagnosis where it doesn’t belong and to refocus our efforts where they are really needed and can do the most good.

I tend to think that drugs in general are here to stay. There is a casual attitude to taking and prescribing them. Consumers need information to be better informed. This subject is a lot like politics; lots of moralizing but nothing changes. It will take some kind of revolution to change the way society sees itself. Education is the key to everything.

I wholeheartedly disagree with the Psychiatric Times.

 

As if psychiatrists are not influenced by the pharmaceutical industry.

 

Anyway, both the patients and PCP are responsible.

Doctors shouldn't prescribe a drug simply because a patient asks for that drug.

They don't do that for benzos, so why do that for other drugs ?

 

With all that education, doctors should be able to think critically. That means that they shouldn't just swallow the industry propaganda, nor should they give to patients whatever they ask for.

Certainly not without informed consent.

 

Or perhaps that education is worthless ? If you can't handle drug promotions, should you be practicing as a doctor at all ?

It is silly to blame this on industry marketing. Psychiatrists-in-training being trained by the pharmaceutical companies is another matter.

 

But to blame commercials ?

 

Quite often, visiting a doctor is endangering one's health.

 

I do take responsibility for my situation. My doctor told me that I needed and "deserved" these meds, but I had been informed of tolerance/dependence issues. I made the decision to take them just like I'm wanting and trying to get off. At this point in my life I feel I must be in control of the things I can be in control of. The pharmaceutical industry puts tremendous pressure on consumers to request all varieties of meds.

 

We watch msnbc at night and I can always tell who they believe their market is by the commercials. Of course it's other things (like tar sand oils) but a substantial portion of the time  it's meds. One currently prominent one is Lunesta. That's one of the z drugs similar to benzos in chemistry. Oh well.

That long term approval for Lunesta is a fraud.

 

Maybe not legally, but doctors should know better.

I don't know how long Lunesta has been around. I think it's relatively recent, and I see those commercials almost every night. Looks and sounds great particularly if one has insomnia which is what it's Rxed for. I didn't even know it was one of the z drugs until I started researching the benzo w/d sx. We really are an accomplished society at getting consumers to buy a lot of crap we don't need and especially to take many drugs that do more harm than good. Truly astonishing.

Most likely Lunesta/eszopiclone is about the same as zopiclone.

 

I'm not sure how long zopiclone has been around, but according to wikipedia as early 1986 !

 

Zopiclone vs. eszopiclone.

 

The wonders of marketing !

 

I bet that silly pill is expensive ?

Most likely it is expensive as it's marketed under the name brand. Today I explained a lot of this benzo thing to my husband who has a TBI. He takes meds to manage his sx and has done well overall. He asked me if he was on any benzos and I told him that luckily he was not. I also told him that I would never allow any dr to Rx one for him. I am glad I have that power as his conservator. A couple of his meds are name brand and they are expensive so I'm sure Lunesta is also.

A short to medium acting benzodiazepine taken (very) infrequently can be safe.

 

Long acting benzodiazepines are more prone to produce dependence.

 

I would prefer to take a hypnotic benzodiazepine for sleep (infrequently) rather than an antidepressant or antipsychotic !

 

Of course, being in withdrawal makes the hypnotics ineffective.

 

 

Yes I agree that these benzos have their place PRN as long as that is way they are used. To calm a racing heart from panic attack is appropriate. Of course if one has that every day, there is now Cognitive Behavioral Therapy or so I hear. It is greatly used in therapeutic community of psychologists, social workers, and licensed professional counselors although I have not tried it obviously or I wouldn't have this benzo long term issue. I work in area where many meds are Rxed and generally feel that we are over medicated society.

  In case of my husband, I also worry about that, but he often appears to do better than me as I experience lovely effects of trying to get off Xanax.

  I can also say that although I am experiencing w/d from Xanax and was before I started to try to transition to klonopin, there is some effectiveness of these meds for me at the moment. I am relatively calm, even though the w/d is uncomfortable. And I am sleeping well, most likely from fatigue due daily exhaustion of coping with w/d.

  I feel this is individual experience for most people. I generally say that we interpret our own individual experiences individually so I think this applies psychologically and physically. Time has taught me that I could have "weathered" my anxiety w/o a drug, but now I have to deal with my present situation realistically and see what I can do to make it work better for me.

  Having said that, I reiterate that we are an over medicated society and a lot of ills could be helped by lifestyle changes rather than a pill.

I so agree with the article in the Psychiatric Times.

I am really disturbed out the DSM. I think part of my upset is that they get so excited about getting new diagnoses to work with - and then, I would suggest, medicate. 

ChristoperXII - if you read this, I was wanting to respond to a blog post you put up a few days. I read it and was thinking about it and then couldn't find it. Hope you are okay.

I watch Bill Maher. He's controversial for a lot of people , but he believes that lifestyle changes could make all the difference. I've evolved so much over the last 10-12yers that I know I was a real wimp to have started this Xanax and lifestyle would have easily handled my anxiety rather than medication.