> This is not something only I have seen but also something one of the best psychiatrist ever had has seen.
This tone is off. This is the tone used politically for the last few years - the tone of: 'Trust me', 'The best people in the world think...' No citations, deliberately saying you won't share links. Or facts. Shame-inducing phrasing like "if you know anything..." Offering points for people who can agree with you?
It is possible that you know what you are talking about. But this tone make it look like you are practicing the style of political rhetoric that has caused so much damage recently, and does not inspire me to take you seriously.
Just in case you all still think they are on the right track with these methods of treating mood disorders, look at the data you are basing your claims on.
"Meta-analyses by industry employees were 22 times less likely to have negative statements about a drug than those run by unaffiliated researchers. The rate of bias in the results is similar to a 2006 study examining industry impact on clinical trials of psychiatric medications, which found that industry-sponsored trials reported favorable outcomes 78 per cent of the time, compared with 48 percent in independently funded trials."
And if you think MDMA treatment is not about money you are worse than ignorant:
Venture capital firms have taken notice—pouring money into startups developing psychedelic treatments for everything from PTSD to smoking cessation. A January analysis by Business Insider identified 11 venture capital firms (most of them founded in the past three years) that have collectively invested roughly $140 million in the psychedelics category. Funding accelerated after psychedelic startup Compass Pathways raised $146 million in its September 2020 initial public offering and an additional $144 million in a secondary offering in April 2021.
The point of MDMA therapy is not to pop it on a regular basis to have higher serotonin levels. There's a reason that MDMA is being used for PTSD and not Depression (although I think it would be useful for non-chemical based cases of depression, e.g. psychological based depression). The point of MDMA is to allow that individual to open up enough and bring down their walls enough such that healing through therapy can actually take place. At least, that is my understanding as a non-expert.
Anecdotally when I've taken SSRIs in the past they worked very quickly, what took 2-4 weeks was the side effects to set in. Everyone's response is so different though, I had a friend who was on an identical dose of an identical drug to me and it effectively and lastingly lifted a deep depression in them while it was the real-life equivalent of the Dementor's Kiss for me.
I'm glad these tools exist and do help people, though I do think the potential risks are downplayed in our society.
> I'm glad these tools exist and do help people, though I do think the potential risks are downplayed in our society.
I have been dealing with severe akathisia from medications I took for severe depression.
I have 2 rare immune mediated neurological diseases affecting my peripheral nervous system plus type 1 diabetes. None of this is even remotely as bad as the akathisia.
There are people who are cancer survivors, combat veterans, rape survivors, who all say that akathisia by far takes the cake in terms of traumatic experiences.
Please if you are going to be taking psych meds of any type, get genetic testing done:
Sorry man, I know several people who were injured by some of these meds. It is not talked about enough when they prescribe them.
Regarding Genomind, these are really limited in how much they will help. They test a limited amount of genes that "might" change drug efficacy. Even taking into account the CYP genetics, if someone is anemic these enzymes will function more slowly so emvironment will trump genetics.
"At this time, DTC advertisements are inappropriate, given the public's limited sophistication regarding genetics and the lack of comprehensive premarket review of tests or oversight of advertisement content."
And from the really the only study claiming that Genomind is effective, from their website:
Citation: Perlis RH, et al. Pharmacogenetic testing among patients with mood and anxiety disorders is associated with decreased utilization and cost: A propensity-score matched study. Depression & Anxiety. 2018;35(10):946-952. doi:10.1002/da.22742
"Dr. Imbens reports personal fees from Genomind, for experimental design related to the submitted work, and personal fees from Eli Lilly, outside the submitted work."
And if you look through all of those studies you will find they were funded by Genomind.
I mean, if you've actually taken MDMA you'll know exactly why it's problematic. In terms of a user, it has a week long comedown, and diminished effects when you take it again soon (about a month) after.
> The fact that I have to post this and that is not known for a drug that’s existed for this long is because People need to be spoonfed their sources.
> It’s hacker news, I’m not writing a research paper.
You are the one making claims. If you aren't going to take the time to back them up with trusted sources don't expect anyone to take your claims seriously.
Why does it matter? Even if I do post from "trusted sources" no one takes it seriously. Children continue to be prescribed prozac to this day, and now we have the next prozac; MDMA.
Get someone here with a degree in Psychiatry and they are a "trusted source" still giving out this medicine that doors not work for the vast vast vast majority of people.
I do not care if people take me seriously, I care if they take the facts seriously. I know I know more about psychopharmacology than the majority of people on HN. I do not need to prove that to anyone.
I have been talking nicely about this stuff for years, it does not matter because the corporate propaganda for these meds is too powerful, so what you hear is a normal human response; frustration. I do not think most people are stupid, I think they are ignorant.
This method of treating symptoms of mood disorders is at best, harmful.
> I have been talking nicely about this stuff for years, it does not matter because the corporate propaganda for these meds is too powerful, so what you hear is a normal human response; frustration.
I hear you, but you're not going to change minds with this kind of talk either. Sorry this has affected your life and those of your loved ones in the way that it has, but it's not helping your case.
I wish you had included even one citation in your first reply, because it would have gone a really long way, even accompanied with the frustration.
I was nice for 25 years. It didn’t change minds. Being nice doesn’t change their mind and neither does being angry. I’m just frustrated and I don’t care anymore. There’s too much money involved in all this for people to change their minds.
This information about the effectiveness of Prozac and most anti-depressants has been out for over 12 years now. What good is it for me to site this information? No one cares. And let’s see if more people started caring, don’t you think the interest, the money interest in these drugs will come back full force?
And whatever about references, references don’t change peoples minds either. Did you just see what happen with Covid? You can show people proof and fax all you want but everyone is in their own individual cult now.
You clearly do care. Otherwise you wouldn't have been so actively involved in the comments here.
Your argumentative, dismissive, downright rude attitude does more harm than good. Perhaps take a step back and think on things for a while before returning to discussions like this.
I meant I don’t care what people think of how I write or speak. I don’t care about being nice. My frustration stems from me caring about people. And caring about people who are being mistreated by doctors.
