Translate

Showing posts with label depression. Show all posts
Showing posts with label depression. Show all posts

Wednesday, 3 February 2021

Inquiry invites your views as concern about psychiatric and physical harm from acne drug isotretinoin / Ro - Accutane / Reticutan / Rizuderm

 Isotretinoin / Roaccutane / Reticutan / Rizuderm / Accutane 

Please submit your views for an Expert Review of your experience or your relative or friend's as to the safety or otherwise of this acne medication.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/isotretinoin-call-for-information-to-be-considered-as-part-of-an-expert-review 

Closing date for submission extend to 16th February 2021 

UK and non UK submissions welcome

Concerns about suicide, depression and physical harm linked to using this acne medication are worldwide. 

EU ADR database records psychiatric Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) 30,295 with reported cases of completed suicide by people using the acne drug 440 by 01/02/21

The original manufacturer Roche withdrew the drug from the US market following extensive amount of litigation. The US litigation was also about the drug causing Inflammatory Bowel Disease such as Ulcerative Colitis.

Only licensed for for severe acne, yet has been given to people with mild acne. One young medical student with a few spots on his back died by suicide - you can hear his father's account here: https://vimeo.com/16759077 

 Roaccutane / isotretinoin and generic versions can cause serious adverse reactions for some people . 

Please submit your views for the Expert Review due to concerns about suicide, depression and physical harm linked to usage - date has been extended until February 16 2021.

Worldwide - not just the UK - so please if you have any views, if you or a family member has concerns about adverse effects you may not expect, such as on libido or mood changes  or  if you were bereaved suddenly and the victim was using or had stopped using the acne drug, please access via the link below and submit your views by Feb 16 2021

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/isotretinoin-call-for-information-to-be-considered-as-part-of-an-expert-review 

Tuesday, 17 July 2018

Many U.S. adults take medicines that can cause depression


Many U.S. adults take medicines that can cause depression

Details of study in Journal of American Medical Association June 2018 repeats what we at APRIL have been warning for the past 20 years.

The researchers, from the University of Illinois at Chicago, looked at how more than 26,000 people from 2005 to 2014 used medications.

They found one third of Americans at risk of  depression as a potential adverse effect.  The medicines include those for acid reflux, birth control, allergies, high blood pressure, and we know of course drugs for acne and anti-malarial are also high risk for possibly causing depression and suicidal thoughts and actions..

The news of this study spread through the world but for some reason not picked up in the UK as far as we know.  There is a video of interview with a doctor on ABC news

https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Wellness/american-adults-prescription-drugs-depression-study/story?id=55846725

Friday, 29 January 2016

Antidepressants double risk of aggression & suicide for young, according to meta analysis of data

Children and adolescents have a doubled risk of aggression and suicide when taking one of the five most commonly prescribed antidepressants, according to findings of a study published in The BMJ today. (The following is taken from the email sent to APRIL by the BMJ.)

However, the true risk for all associated serious harms, such as deaths, aggression, akathisia and suicidal thoughts and attempts, remains unknown for children, adolescents and adults, say experts.
This is because of the poor design of clinical trials that assess these antidepressants, and the misreporting of findings in published articles.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors antidepressants (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) are the most commonly prescribed drugs for depression.
A team of researchers from Denmark carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of 68 clinical study reports of 70 trials with 18,526 patients to examine use of antidepressants and associated serious harms.
These included deaths, suicidal thoughts and attempts as well as aggression and akathisia, a form of restlessness that may increase suicide and violence.

They examined double blind placebo controlled trials that contained patient narratives or individual patient listings of associated harms.

Harms associated with antidepressants are often not included in published trial reports, explain the authors. This is why they analysed clinical study reports, prepared by pharmaceutical companies for market authorisation, and summary trial reports, both of which usually include more information.
In adults, they found no significant associations between antidepressants and suicide and aggression. However, a novel finding showed there was a doubling of risk for aggression and suicides in children and adolescents.

This study has shown limitations in trials, not only in design, but also in reporting of clinical study reports, which may have lead to "serious under-estimation of the harms," write the authors.
They compared the results from the clinical study reports with data from individual patient listings or narratives of adverse effects. This revealed misclassification of deaths and suicidal events in people taking antidepressants.

For example, four deaths were misreported by a pharmaceutical company, in all cases favouring the antidepressant, and more than half of the suicide attempts and suicidal ideation, for example, were coded as "emotional lability" or "worsening of depression."
In the Eli Lilly summary trial reports, almost all deaths were noted, but suicidal attempts were missing in 90% of instances, and information on other outcomes was incomplete. These were "even more unreliable than we previously suspected," write the authors.

Clinical study reports for antidepressants duloxetine, fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline and venlafaxine were obtained from regulatory agencies in the UK and Europe. Summary trial reports for duloxetine and fluoxetine were taken from the drug company Eli Lilly's website.

However, clinical study reports could not be obtained for all trials and all antidepressants, and individual listings of adverse outcomes for all patients were available for only 32 trials.
"The true risk for serious harms is still unknown [because] the low incidence of these rare events, and the poor design and reporting of the trials, makes it difficult to get accurate effect estimates," they explain.

They recommend "minimal use of antidepressants in children, adolescents, and young adults, as the serious harms seem to be greater, and as their effect seems to be below what is clinically relevant," and suggest alternative treatments such as exercise or psychotherapy.
They also call for the need to identify "hidden information in clinical study reports to form a more accurate view of the benefits and harms of drugs."

In an accompanying editorial, Joanna Moncrieff from University College London, agrees that "regulators and the public need access to more comprehensive and reliable data", and that clinical study reports "are likely to underestimate the extent of drug related harms."
Over half the clinical study reports had no individual patient listings and "this begs the question of how many more adverse events would have been revealed if [these] were available for all trials, and raises concerns why this information is allowed to be withheld."
Link to research
Link to editorial

 

Additional information about antidepressant trial data added to this blog February 2017


Restoring Study 329 - The study that disproved anti-depressants’ efficacy

 

A major reanalysis of the infamous clinical trial, Study 329, has shown Paroxetine (also known as Paxil or Seroxat), one of the most commonly prescribed antidepressants, to be unsafe and no more effective than a placebo.

 

This new assessment directly contradicts the results of the clinical trial that claimed Seroxat to be “generally well tolerated and effective”, which was sponsored by and ghostwritten for GlaxoSmithKline, despite using the same original data.

 

The latest paper was published under the restoring invisible and abandoned trials (RIAT) initiative, in order to re-evaluate any conclusions drawn from evidence that had previously been hidden from public view.

 

Published in 2001, Study 329 generated a high level of controversy from patients and doctors after lawsuits were filed stating the side-effects were much more serious than those documented in the clinical trials.

 

Restoring Study 329, showed Paroxetine (Seroxat or Paxil) to have no significant reduction of depressive symptoms more than a placebo or previous anti-depressants, and gave users a higher chance of psychiatric side effects.

 

The original study came under intense scrutiny following revelations that it was ghost written by GSK authors and not those named on the study, and the primary data was not made publically available.

 

The findings of Study 329, originally published in 2001, was the first double blind patient study to report the efficacy of anti-depressants on adolescents.

 

It has allowed Seroxat to gain widespread approval by the healthcare industry, becoming the most widely prescribed anti-depressant in the US, with over 14 billion dolllars worth of sales between 1997 and 2004.

 

Following a decade of public and legal pressure, GSK finally released the original data to the public, making its reanalysis possible.

 

These devastating results overturning the original paper may come as no surprise to many who have already suffered loss and harm from the drug. In  2012 GSK were successfully sued $3 billion for fraudulently promoting Paroxetine to the public, and hiding key data in its study, such as reclassifying suicidal acts so that they would not count in the final analysis.

 

To this day however, GSK remain silent on the issue and continue to promote the drug to its customers, without any attempt to acknowledge the restoration of the study.

 

A personal note to our readers:

 

As we reveal these facts about Seroxat, we do not wish to condemn all use of anti-depressants nor encourage the immediate withdrawal from the medication.  It is important to obtain advice from responsible health professionals who can help to plan any reduction in drugs that may cause dependence. It is also important to inform those close to you when you plan to start, reduce or stop taking antidepressants.

 

We wish to highlight the potential dangers and risks of Paroxetine and similar medication, and let readers understand that medical information to support the drug can be unreliable or biased.

 

Both starting and coming off anti-depressants is a serious undertaking and we strongly advise that users seek professional medical help as well as inform either close friends or family when doing so, as it can be a tough process which needs careful monitoring and support.

 

We recommend considering talking therapy and CBT to those who have access to these services, as these have been shown to provide beneficial reductions of depression and anxiety with fewer and less serious side effects.

 

©JBforAPRIL

 

Further Reading

 

Article on Study 329


British Medical Journal Analysis of Study 329


David Healy’s website on the controversy of Study 329


Restored Study 329



 

Thursday, 16 October 2014

Non-psychiatric drugs linked to suicidal behaviour and depression in new study

Adverse side effects of medicines can be underestimated and often not recognised as such. 110 drugs prescribed on the NHS have been linked to depression, self-harm and suicidal behaviour in a scientific study of patient Yellow Cards drug reaction reports sent to the Medicine’s Regulatory agency, the MHRA.

The paper published this September 2014 in the journal BMC Pharmacology & Toxicology is believed to be the first UK systematic review of psychiatric side-effects. Researchers found reports of 11,000 cases of depression, self injurious and suicidal behaviour following prescribed drug use between 1964 and 2011. This number covered 1.65% of all reports received in this time period.

Anti-depressants, acne, smoking cessation and weight-loss drugs were most frequently linked with serious psychiatric adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Clozapine, the anti-psychotic drug, had the highest reporting rate of suicide, with 78 reports between 1998 and 2011 linking the fatality to the drug.

Both nervous system and non-nervous system drugs met the study’s thresholds of at least 20 reports for depression, 10 for non-fatal suicide and 5 for fatal suicide between 1998 and 2011. Topping the charts with most frequent reports of depression were smoking cessation medicine, varenicline (Champix / Chantix) and bupriopion (Wellbutrin / Zyban), followed by paroxetine (Seroxat or Paxil), the SSRI antidepressant. Also high on the list of drugs linked to depression were the acne treatment, isotretinoin (Roaccutane / Accutane), and rimonabant (Acomplia), a drug for weight loss. For suicidal and self injurious behaviour, SSRIs, varenicline and clozapine occurred most often.

Figures found in the study are likely to underrepresent the true count of iatrogenic effects (drug-induced side effects) as the Yellow Card reporting system remains relatively underused by both patients and healthcare professionals.

The paper recommends the drugs most commonly arising in patient reports for grave psychiatric conditions need further analysis to understand the reasons why these drugs might be causing undue harm.

When a drug is licensed for prescription, pre-market trials do not undergo full powered studies into adverse drug reactions (ADRs) as this would require larger numbers of participants. Post-marketing pharmacovigilance using the Yellow Card reporting system and its careful analysis is therefore one of the main ways we can achieve a fuller picture into the neglected area of patient experience with medication.
Due to poor publicity and the underpowered studies of iatrogenic effects, psychiatric drug reactions and withdrawal effects are neither sufficiently well recognised nor analysed in the medical community. A study published in 2004 found that fewer than half of pharmacy programmes and medical schools provided students with a guide to reporting ADRs. Yet NHS Education for Scotland (NES), in a press release published in June 2014, stated that 7% of acute hospital admissions were due to ADRs. The NES have thus launched six new e-learning modules to support healthcare professionals identifying and reporting iatrogenic symptoms. Clinical pharmacologist Dr Simon Maxwell published an article reporting that undergraduate study is in urgent need of review to improve the safe and effective use of drugs in patients. 74% of medical students felt the amount of teaching in this area of safe prescribing  was ‘too little’ or ‘far too little’, and most disagreed that their assessment ‘thoroughly tested knowledge and skills’.

If we are to reduce the effect of ADRs on the population, and their economic impact that costs the NHS an estimated £2 billion each year, healthcare professionals and pharmaceutical companies need to make best use of new information made available by patient reporting.

Jacqueline Bond blogging for APRIL

Tuesday, 5 August 2014

Contraceptive Pill links to Depression on BBC radio 4 Woman's Hour Today


Contraceptive Pill links to Depression

Today on BBC Radio 4 in the excellent programme Woman's Hour, I heard a discussion about the contraceptive pill and links to depression.

I would like to congratulate the presenter, Emma Barnett for her enlightened attention to what is a serious problem for many women. Sadly so many women do not link their mood swings, depression and failure to cope, with prescribed medication including the Pill. Many women are prescribed antidepressants to help them deal with depression that may not be a problem once they stop taking a particular contraceptive or other medication.

Please refer to my campaign about Dianette ( click Dianette to link to Guardian article) as the doctor on the programme seemed to promote the fact that skin and other problems can improve with certain contraceptives.

He failed to mention that Dianette, the drug promoted for acne is the one that is not actually licensed for contraception (though it has a contraceptive action) due to higher risk of dvt, blood clots. Banned for a while by the EU this comes with warnings. It may be valuable for women considering this drug, to have their blood clotting factor checked before embarking on using Dianette (also known as Diane 35 and many other generic names.). The doctor did mention that loss of libido as a possible adverse drug reaction (ADR).

We will never know how many suicides are linked to prescribed drugs that cause depression - in other words, are not tolerated, with the addition drugs prescribed for the depression, that are also not tolerated.

You can hear the radio 4 programme on BBC iplayer Contraceptive Pill links to Depression

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04cbv9g

Wednesday, 4 June 2014

Project about depression - please contribute to survey

Questions about depression?

We at APRIL have been trying for years to persuade doctors and official bodies to ensure people who are suffering adverse reaction to everyday medicines or anaesthetics or having problems related to withdrawal from prescribed drugs,  are heard and helped.

 Adverse drug reactions (ADRs)  and withdrawal effects can be depression, anxiety, insomnia, psychosis, self harming, or suicidal thoughts and actions.

Please contribute to the survey at www.depressionarq.org 

This is part of a major project about depression research. The aim is to inform research and provide a strong connection between researchers and the needs of patients.

Unfortunately if patient groups involved in this research have received substantial funding from the pharmaceutical industry, there will be attempts to cover up the extent of depression and suicides linked to medication adverse effects or withdrawal problems. It is therefore very important for those with experience of iatrogenic (treatment induced) depression or related conditions to express their views.

As difficult as it may be for those bereaved by iatrogenic related death of a loved one, we do appeal for you to please make your views known.

The survey gives patients, carers and clinicians a chance to let the organisers know what questions need to be answered. Questions can be about any aspect of depression; prevention, causes, diagnosis,
treatments or care.

Visit www.depressionarq.org to take part

Tuesday, 29 April 2014

A small victory for families who have campaigned since tragic suicides linked to Roaccutane.


A small victory for families who have campaigned since tragic suicides linked to Roaccutane

The article in Mail on Line states there will be a review of Roaccutane (isotretinoin) by the Commission on Human Medicines. 

We have tried for years to persuade a Professor of pharmacogenetics to do a study to find a genetic test and discover why a drug, so popular with those it has helped with acne problems, yet has a devastating adverse effects for those it harms and for their families.

We even went so far, with the help of the Medland family who are featured in the article, as to have a meeting in Liverpool with dermatologists, the professor and others about how to go about this study.

We found family members where one had a severe adverse reaction and the other did not. In the case of twins, one rushed to hospital in a life threatening condition and the other not after taking Roaccutane.

The drug is derived from vitamin A which is a linked to severe psychiatric and other reactions in high doses. The fact that some people may be slow metabolisers and therefore may have toxic levels of Roaccuane due to the drug not dispersing quickly, seems to be seldom considered.

Please read the article and take into account that in the case of Jon Medland, his problem was not a severe case of acne and he was not really a person who should have been prescribed the drug. He was however a medical student at the time and therefore slipped through the net.

Others who have been prescribed were also not classic severe cases where many other treatments had failed. In some dermatology clinics, there is careful monitoring. In some cases no monitoring of the patient's mood. 

I was at an  inquest where the dermatologist not only shrugged off his responsibility and even prescribed Dianette to a depressed girl who was deeply concerned about the harm Roaccutane was doing by seriously drying up her skin. 

I asked him why he prescribed Dianette and he responded " I couldn't risk her getting pregnant on Roaccutane" (the drug is known to cause deformity in foetus). I said to him " but Dianette is not licensed as a contraceptive" to which he did not respond. This man runs a private practice in Harley Street and did not know Dianette is linked to depression and not licensed for contraception due to higher risk of blood clots than other drugs for this purpose. It is licensed for acne. 
The poor girl who died was also prescribed by other doctors = Prozac and Zopiclone...a potent cocktail for a deeply depressed vulnerable girl - her name was Angela Lee and the coroner just brushed asside the cocktail of drugs in the jury inquest I attended.

I personally know a young man who was an A grade student, he dropped out and later told me he thought Roaccutane had caused his depression. Sadly his family shunned his concerns and considered him a failure. Tragic and it still upsets me to think he understood the cause of his problems and yet got no support from his family. He is not the only person in this situation and many others have written to me with similar stories.

I just want to say how strongly I support the Medland family and all those family members who do not give up in their efforts to save other lives. We do understand why some families shut themselves away in their grief but if we all did that there would be no changes in patient safety issues. 

Thursday, 17 May 2012

Are statins safe for everyone? research data compared to patient experience


Research data as compared to patient experience in the case of Statins

The ludicrous headline in the Telegraph and the article repeating the view that Statins are good following dubious based research has attracted over 700 comments from the public. This shows that people are not fooled by trial data funded by the industry and professors looking for funding for their university.

When pharmaceutical drugs are licensed for use by the general population, one would think that evidence of the safety of these drugs would have been established.

The manufacturers look specifically for the action of a drug but not for the harms in the clinical trials, so often harms are not recorded. Patients who drop out of trials due to adverse drug reactions may not be listed. Withdrawal effects are not followed up. Raw data is not seen by the licensing authority, only summaries of trial data produced by companies that rely on the good favour or the pharmaceutical company for their livelihood.

Less than 10% of serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are reported and some health professionals think the figure is more like 1%

Emergency hospital admissions due to ADRs have increased by 76.8% over 10years and deaths by 10% (official statistics) http://jrsm.rsmjournals.com/content/103/6/239.full
So where does that leave the patients?

We are bombarded with Disease awareness campaigns telling us that if a diagnostic test result is below or above a certain number we are at risk –
We have to ask the question

Are we put at more risk by the treatment than the test number prediction.?

Why does a headline such as today’s in The Telegraph, quote such nonsense as Statins should be prescribed to everyone over the age of 50?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9269027/All-over-50s-should-be-taking-statins.html

I had a conversation with a renowned consultant urologist this morning about the claims by Professor Colin Baigent that Statins should be prescribed to more people, the consultant was as horrified as I was. He said "statins are not safe for everyone. What about the Asian community who are at greater risk from statins." He mentioned the harm to liver and kidney, the increase in alzheimers?

A Professor of Clinical Pharmacology said to me:

“Would you take a lifestyle drug now to prevent something that may never happen in the future, that could make you ill now”

Questions to ask before you take Professor Baigen’s comment seriously.


Will he benefit by obtaining funding for his research. Who provides the funding for the research?


What are the details of the 27 random trials that the study took the data from?


o Were the 27 random trials all independent of pharmaceutical company funding?

o Did the random trials include people from the Asian and other populations known to be at increased risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) from statins

o How many women were included in the random trials (as it is know that statins were originally licensed following clinical trials mainly on men)

o Were the people on dummy pills (placebo) free of previous history of heart conditions.

The statement in the report “for every 1000 people in the low risk group treated with statins for five years there would be 11 fewer major hear attacks or strokes - A benefit that greatly exceeds any known hazards of statin therapy” needs teasing apart.
For example official statistics claim less than 10% of serious ADR are reported.

Read the forums with memory loss linked to statin use. These are not in the official statistics.

How many people are receiving steroid injections for muscle pain without being told to stop the statins or being given a CK test as recommended by the manufacturers.
What are the ‘know hazards of statin therapy?
They include

o Memory loss

o Bleeding strokes (burst blood vessel in brain)

o Muscle weakness and worse (rhabdomyolysis)

o Kidney failure

o Liver conditions

o Depression

o Diabetes

o Sleep problems

o Stomach problems

o Headaches

Take a careful look at the data provided by Pfizer before you decide to take a statin

http://www.medicines.org.uk/EMC/medicine/1424/SPC/Lipitor+10mg%2c+20mg%2c+40mg%2c+80mg+Tablets

Official pharmaceutical company data sheet – summary of product characteristics (SPC) – for Lipitor and the same for all statins states: The patient should be placed on a standard cholesterol-lowering diet before receiving Lipitor and should continue on this diet during treatment with Lipitor.

Data sheet states under 4.4 Special warnings and precautions for use:

  • Liver function tests should be performed before the initiation of treatment and periodically thereafter
  • Lipitor should be used with caution in patients who consume substantial quantities of alcohol and/or have a history of liver disease.









Tuesday, 19 July 2011

Overprescribing antidepressants- hear psychiatrist Joanna Moncrieff on BBC radio4

Antidepressants broadcast to hear - information below taken from BBC Woman's Hour web site - Dr Joanna Moncrieff who wrote the book "The Myth of the Chemical Cure" defends the fact that antidepressants are psychoactive drugs that may affect the way we think but do not solve our problems. No mention on this broadcast of the problems of withdrawal from the SSRI antidepressants. For Professor David Healy's SSRI withdrawal protocol email APRIL and we will send you a copy.

"A third of women have taken antidepressants at some point in their lives, according to a survey carried out by the women’s group Platform 51. And nearly half of women currently on antidepressants have been on them for five years or more. Are GPs too quick to prescribe tablets for depression? Once on them, how easy is it for women to stop? How regularly do patients need to be monitored by their GPs? And what are the alternatives to drugs? Jenni will be joined by Dr Joanna Moncrieff, a Psychiatrist at University College, London and Dr Clare Gerada, Chair of the Royal College of GPs."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b012krr5#synopsis

Available now on BBC iPlayer at the above link
Listen to the latest programme


Tuesday, 6 October 2009

Angela Lee suicide

Angela Lee 'staggered' and fell in front of a train according to the shocked female train driver of a train travelling at 90 miles per hour. Angela had left a note and felt that the acne drug ro-accutane (isotretionoin) had caused lasting problems. I can confirm that many people who contact me say depression, which they believe was caused by roaccutane lasts for months and years after they stop taking the drug. Angela was prescribed fluoxetine (Prozac) and Zopiclone which she was taking at the time of her death.

I sat in the Walthamstow Coroner's court and heard the evidence given to the jury and was also shocked to hear that Angela was given Dianette at the same time as she was prescribed Roaccutane. None of the journalists commented on this cocktail of drugs - all linked to causing suicidal feelings.

Another problem was the failure of health professionals who cared for Angela, to communicate by picking up a telephone to speak to each other and discuss how best to protect her from harm.