![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 93 to 117 of 123. Go back in thread:
Posted by SLS on July 18, 2013, at 8:00:53
In reply to Lou's response-phalz » laurah952, posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2013, at 6:19:01
Lou Pilder garners the respect that he deserves as the result of the words he posts.
> Laurah and friends,
> Laurah wrote,[...If Lou is allowed to post here, I will not be back...I'm being called a murderer-my own child...].
> Laurah has posted a false statement about me here, for I have not called her any such thing.Where do you suppose she got this idea from? The subject line, perhaps?
"Lou's response-ihnphanticyde » laurah952 Lou Pilder 6/28/13"
ihnphanticyde = infanticide?
You directed this message to laurah952.
> Her statement could harm my reputation and decrease the respect, regard or confidence in which I am held,and induce disparging, hostile , or disagreeable opinions or feelings against me.
Yes. This is the risk anyone runs whenever they post a message.
> The word "infanticide" is a {policy} that a country has to kill infants
This is disinformation designed to cover-up your uncivil behavior. The word "infanticide" can apply to a single person. That not withstanding, you changed the subject line to inject your name and a poorly-encrypted representation of this word and directed this message towards laurah952. Her conclusion that you were directing the word "infanticide" at her personally was perfectly reasonable.
> Parents, there are tactics to get people to discard what another person is saying.
Yes. I occasionally like to use one's own words against them as a tactic.
> These tactics are as ancient as infanticide.
This sentence is just another tactic on your part designed to obfuscate the fact that you directed the letter sequence, "ihnphanticyde", towards laurah952 specifically.
As usual, you use the 42,000 number to infer cause and effect. Your statements are always successfully refuted in this forum.
You have demonstrated once again that your apologies are disingenuous.
"Lou's apology- Lou PIlder 6/29/13"
Perhaps you can direct your apology to laurah952 personally.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2013, at 9:40:58
In reply to 14yo daughter - bi-polar, not MDD - new info HELP » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on July 18, 2013, at 8:00:53
> Lou Pilder garners the respect that he deserves as the result of the words he posts.
>
> > Laurah and friends,
> > Laurah wrote,[...If Lou is allowed to post here, I will not be back...I'm being called a murderer-my own child...].
> > Laurah has posted a false statement about me here, for I have not called her any such thing.
>
> Where do you suppose she got this idea from? The subject line, perhaps?
>
> "Lou's response-ihnphanticyde » laurah952 Lou Pilder 6/28/13"
>
> ihnphanticyde = infanticide?
>
> You directed this message to laurah952.
>
> > Her statement could harm my reputation and decrease the respect, regard or confidence in which I am held,and induce disparging, hostile , or disagreeable opinions or feelings against me.
>
> Yes. This is the risk anyone runs whenever they post a message.
>
> > The word "infanticide" is a {policy} that a country has to kill infants
>
> This is disinformation designed to cover-up your uncivil behavior. The word "infanticide" can apply to a single person. That not withstanding, you changed the subject line to inject your name and a poorly-encrypted representation of this word and directed this message towards laurah952. Her conclusion that you were directing the word "infanticide" at her personally was perfectly reasonable.
>
> > Parents, there are tactics to get people to discard what another person is saying.
>
> Yes. I occasionally like to use one's own words against them as a tactic.
>
> > These tactics are as ancient as infanticide.
>
> This sentence is just another tactic on your part designed to obfuscate the fact that you directed the letter sequence, "ihnphanticyde", towards laurah952 specifically.
>
> As usual, you use the 42,000 number to infer cause and effect. Your statements are always successfully refuted in this forum.
>
> You have demonstrated once again that your apologies are disingenuous.
>
> "Lou's apology- Lou PIlder 6/29/13"
>
> Perhaps you can direct your apology to laurah952 personally.
>
>
> - ScottFriends,
Scott wrote,[...where do you suppose she got this idea from? The subject line, perhaps?...].
The word infanticide concerns the killing of *infants*, usually at birth. An infant is not the subjet ot the thread involved.
If someone does not understand what a word means, that is something that is of another aspect here. I apologise for anyone that is ignorant of the meaning of the word as to if they thought erroneously about it in this case, for it was not my intention for the word to fall on those minds that were ignorant of the meaning of the word. I was not directing the coded word to anyone, for it is a code for my cataloging of posts here. It belongs in the aspect of that I am prevented from posting here what IMHHHO could save lives and the lives of children due to the prohibitions to me by Mr Hsiung. His argument is that what he does {will be} good for this community as a whole as in his TOS here. That is the same argument used by states to commit infanticide. As to if or if not infanticide was good for that state that practiced it, the children still were killed. I value life as a higher priority that if what Mr Hsiung does here will be good for this community as a whole. And I will fight the good fight myself if I have to, for children and adults to have all the facts known to them so that they do not have to blindly follow the leader in the hope that the community will be better by trusting someone that supresses my speech, speech that I think could mark the difference between life and death if the prohibitions were not made to me here. Good for the community as a whole? I want it to be good for the child and the adult, and for the child to live, and for the adult to live, and I think THAT wikll be good for this community as a whole, my friends.We do not know in the future as to what Mr Hsiung does here will or will not be good for this community as a whole. Time will be the judge of that. And what good could come to this site if one child, or one adult, dies from these drugs promoted here and could have lived if they were allowed to hear me?
Lou
Posted by SLS on July 18, 2013, at 12:27:55
In reply to Lou's reply-gudphoarhu? » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2013, at 9:40:58
Oops. I apologize. Good for you. You got me on the word "infanticide" as it applies to the initiator of this thread. It was a lapse of logic on my part. A 14 year old is obviously not an infant. It is interesting that most people reacted the way she and I did. Unfortunately, I am too conditioned by you so as to expect that your posts will exaggerate, over-generalize, accuse, and promote disinformation.
I'll try to be more careful.
> "Whatever is said about me here does not annul the fact that these drugs promoted here for even children to take, still killed 42,000 people last year alone, as the generally accepted number"
Next time, perhaps you could properly quote the verbiage used by your source and cite the webpage on which it appears so that we can examine its content. It has been awhile since I looked at it. I could then respond accordingly.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on July 18, 2013, at 14:02:18
In reply to Lou's reply-gudphoarhu? » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2013, at 9:40:58
Quoting Mercola is not sufficient. You need to supply the scientific evidence that Mercola uses to support his pronouncements.
- Scott
Posted by laurah952 on July 18, 2013, at 16:30:52
In reply to Lou's response-phalz » laurah952, posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2013, at 6:19:01
Laurah wrote,[...If Lou is allowed to post here, I will not be back...I'm being called a murderer-my own child...].
Laurah has posted a false statement about me here, for I have not called her any such thing. Her statement could harm my reputation and decrease the respect, regard or confidence in which I am held,and induce disparging, hostile , or disagreeable opinions or feelings against me.
Really?? Are we still on this? You put the term "infanticide" right next to my name when you changed the thread header. You're a mean-spirited moron for that... no matter the meaning (and we all know what it means anyway) Do you have nothing else to do?????I just have to laugh when you say that I could harm your reputation, or decrease the respect or regard to which you believe you're held. I don't believe that's possible.. Leave me the hell alone.
Posted by laurah952 on July 18, 2013, at 16:33:43
In reply to 14yo daughter - bi-polar, not MDD - new info HELP » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on July 18, 2013, at 8:00:53
> Lou Pilder garners the respect that he deserves as the result of the words he posts.
>
> > Laurah and friends,
> > Laurah wrote,[...If Lou is allowed to post here, I will not be back...I'm being called a murderer-my own child...].
> > Laurah has posted a false statement about me here, for I have not called her any such thing.
>
> Where do you suppose she got this idea from? The subject line, perhaps?
>
> "Lou's response-ihnphanticyde » laurah952 Lou Pilder 6/28/13"
>
> ihnphanticyde = infanticide?
>
> You directed this message to laurah952.
>
> > Her statement could harm my reputation and decrease the respect, regard or confidence in which I am held,and induce disparging, hostile , or disagreeable opinions or feelings against me.
>
> Yes. This is the risk anyone runs whenever they post a message.
>
> > The word "infanticide" is a {policy} that a country has to kill infants
>
> This is disinformation designed to cover-up your uncivil behavior. The word "infanticide" can apply to a single person. That not withstanding, you changed the subject line to inject your name and a poorly-encrypted representation of this word and directed this message towards laurah952. Her conclusion that you were directing the word "infanticide" at her personally was perfectly reasonable.
>
> > Parents, there are tactics to get people to discard what another person is saying.
>
> Yes. I occasionally like to use one's own words against them as a tactic.
>
> > These tactics are as ancient as infanticide.
>
> This sentence is just another tactic on your part designed to obfuscate the fact that you directed the letter sequence, "ihnphanticyde", towards laurah952 specifically.
>
> As usual, you use the 42,000 number to infer cause and effect. Your statements are always successfully refuted in this forum.
>
> You have demonstrated once again that your apologies are disingenuous.
>
> "Lou's apology- Lou PIlder 6/29/13"
>
> Perhaps you can direct your apology to laurah952 personally.
>
>
> - ScottWell said, Scott, and thank you - Laura
Posted by laurah952 on July 18, 2013, at 16:38:44
In reply to 14yo daughter - bi-polar, not MDD - new info HELP » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on July 18, 2013, at 12:27:55
> "Whatever is said about me here does not annul the fact that these drugs promoted here for even children to take, still killed 42,000 people last year alone, as the generally accepted number"
Prove it, Moron
Posted by SLS on July 18, 2013, at 16:57:53
In reply to Re: 14yo daughter - bi-polar, not MDD - new info HELP » SLS, posted by laurah952 on July 18, 2013, at 16:38:44
> > "Whatever is said about me here does not annul the fact that these drugs promoted here for even children to take, still killed 42,000 people last year alone, as the generally accepted number"
>
> Prove it, MoronUnfortunately, Lou Pilder is too clever to be a moron.
Lou Pilder is frustrating to interact with. I would also like to see him prove his assertion. So far, all of his previous attempts to use this pseudofact have failed. It does get tiresome, though, to put out the same fires each and every day in the way Dr. Bob would have us do. If I knew that no one were to be hurt or deceived by Lou Pilder, I wouldn't really give a damn what he wrote.
Laura, I do hope that you decide to continue posting on Psycho-Babble. I guess we both need time to cool-off. You are intelligent, deliberative, and very likeable, and make for pleasant conversation. Perhaps you would find the Social forum appealing.
How is Taylor doing?
- Scott
Posted by SLS on July 18, 2013, at 19:51:52
In reply to Re: 14yo daughter - bi-polar, not MDD - new info HELP » SLS, posted by laurah952 on July 18, 2013, at 16:38:44
> Prove it...
By the way, I understood that your remark was not directed towards me. No worries.
- Scott
Posted by Phillipa on July 18, 2013, at 20:14:55
In reply to Lou's reply-gudphoarhu? » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on July 18, 2013, at 9:40:58
Are you calling myself and others ignorant? I take offense at this. Phillipa
Posted by laurah952 on July 19, 2013, at 9:08:06
In reply to Re: 14yo daughter - bi-polar, not MDD - new info HELP » laurah952, posted by SLS on July 18, 2013, at 16:57:53
> > > "Whatever is said about me here does not annul the fact that these drugs promoted here for even children to take, still killed 42,000 people last year alone, as the generally accepted number"
> >
> > Prove it, Moron
>
> Unfortunately, Lou Pilder is too clever to be a moron.
>
> Lou Pilder is frustrating to interact with. I would also like to see him prove his assertion. So far, all of his previous attempts to use this pseudofact have failed. It does get tiresome, though, to put out the same fires each and every day in the way Dr. Bob would have us do. If I knew that no one were to be hurt or deceived by Lou Pilder, I wouldn't really give a damn what he wrote.
>
> Laura, I do hope that you decide to continue posting on Psycho-Babble. I guess we both need time to cool-off. You are intelligent, deliberative, and very likeable, and make for pleasant conversation. Perhaps you would find the Social forum appealing.
>
> How is Taylor doing?
>
>
> - ScottI wanted to post that Taylor is doing well, and then saw this still on-going debate. Lou may be a clever man in many ways, but it is my opinion that one who "posts that he cannot post" over and over again, pulling "statistics" from nowhere, is in my opinion, (and at best) ridiculously redundant for doing so. I lost my filter, and apologize for name calling; it's just not necessary.
To the matter at hand - Taylor saw a new adolescent pdoc, and her official diagnosis is that of bi-polar disorder II. I really don't see mania in her, just normal happy and then a little down right now. She's not stuffing her feelings anymore, and is expressing anger/frustration in a healthy way. Her thoughts of suicide are fleeting, and do not occur every day as they used to. She's happy, but doesn't like herself. She will continue with intensive therapy.
The pdoc took her off Zoloft starting today, and gave her prozac for a few days to help with any withdrawal symptoms. She will maintain the 25 mg. Seroquel, follow up next week, and procede from there. It is my hope to have her off meds completely, or on a small dose of a mood stabilizer if needed. We shall see.
Thanks,
Laura
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 28, 2013, at 5:57:08
In reply to Re: 14yo daughter - bi-polar, not MDD - new info HELP » SLS, posted by laurah952 on July 18, 2013, at 16:38:44
> > "Whatever is said about me here does not annul the fact that these drugs promoted here for even children to take, still killed 42,000 people last year alone, as the generally accepted number"
>
> Prove it, MoronFriends,
It is written here,[...prove it, M*r*n..]
Be advised that whatever is being said about my character here, does not mean that it is true. I am not a m*r*n.
Be advised that I am prevented to post here what I would like to in a response to what I am said to be here due to the prohibitions posted to me here by Mr Hsiung. If you are trying to make a more informed decision as to drug or not either yourself or one that you have responsibility for, such as a child or a parent, be advised that the number 42,000 is a {generally accepted} number of those killed by psychiatric drugs last year alone and you can do a Google search,[psychiatric drugs, deaths, 42000] and see all the pages upon pages of reports that use that number of people killed last year alone from these drugs.
Friends, I am trying to save lives here and prevent life-ruining conditions and addictions. If you are swayed by what is written here about me so that you think that these drugs will not harm you or kill you or addict you, or anyone in your control, then I feel sad. This is all because it could be thought to be supportive here for what is written about my character because support takes precedence here, and if there is allowed to stand statements about me, then you could think that it is supportive here for what the statement purports. But I say to you, seek the truth while it can be found and you can make your own decision as to if I am a M*r*n or not.
Lou
Posted by SLS on July 28, 2013, at 6:57:47
In reply to Lou's response-Moarohn?, posted by Lou Pilder on July 28, 2013, at 5:57:08
> be advised that the number 42,000 is a {generally accepted} number of those killed by psychiatric drugs
At one point, it was generally accepted that the world was flat.
The 42,000 appears to be a pseudofact gone viral. It's like a rumor. More and more people on the Internet rely on it in their writings without knowing its source. Apparently, there is no data source nor scientific study to scrutinize this assertion. Whatever the number, sadly, some percentage of deaths associated with antidepressants involves suicide. Psychotropic drugs are often chosen for suicide because they are convenient.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on July 28, 2013, at 6:59:58
In reply to Re: Lou's response-Moarohn?, posted by SLS on July 28, 2013, at 6:57:47
> be advised that the number 42,000 is a {generally accepted} number of those killed by psychiatric drugs
At one point, it was generally accepted that the world was flat.
The 42,000 appears to be a pseudofact gone viral. It's like a rumor. More and more people on the Internet rely on it in their writings without knowing its source. Apparently, there is no data source nor scientific study to scrutinize this assertion. Whatever the number, sadly, some percentage of deaths associated with antidepressants involves suicide. Psychotropic drugs are often chosen for suicide because they are convenient.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on July 28, 2013, at 7:04:23
In reply to Re: 14yo daughter - bi-polar, not MDD - new info HELP » SLS, posted by laurah952 on July 19, 2013, at 9:08:06
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 28, 2013, at 7:59:31
In reply to Re: Lou's response-Moarohn?, posted by SLS on July 28, 2013, at 6:57:47
> > be advised that the number 42,000 is a {generally accepted} number of those killed by psychiatric drugs
>
> At one point, it was generally accepted that the world was flat.
>
> The 42,000 appears to be a pseudofact gone viral. It's like a rumor. More and more people on the Internet rely on it in their writings without knowing its source. Apparently, there is no data source nor scientific study to scrutinize this assertion. Whatever the number, sadly, some percentage of deaths associated with antidepressants involves suicide. Psychotropic drugs are often chosen for suicide because they are convenient.
>
> - ScottFriends,
It is written here,[...The 42000 appears to be a pseudofact...without knowing its source...Apparently, there is no data source nor scientific study to scrutinize this assertion...].
Be advised that the 42000 deaths just last year alone is a number that is generally accepted because of a great amount of research done to arrive at this number. The number of deaths is just for those that were killed by the drugs in the U.S. last year. Each country could report its own number of deaths from psychiatric drugs.
Here is one research article that only covers deaths from psychiatric drugs from sudden deaths related to cardiac events. Then there is research in relation to deaths from these drugs by other means.
Lou
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3349287
Posted by laurah952 on July 28, 2013, at 9:18:50
In reply to Lou's response-Moarohn?, posted by Lou Pilder on July 28, 2013, at 5:57:08
Friends, I am trying to save lives here and prevent life-ruining conditions and addictions.
Lou, perhaps you are trying to help in your own way, but have you considered it even remotely possible that in any way someone severely depressed or psychotic and highly suicidal may have read your posts, regarded them as absolute truth, and terrified them into avoiding psychiatric medications, only to end up not seeking help at all? What might that have done to someone who really needed to see a psychiatrist? Could they have committed suicide, believing that there is no help for them? (as you state that you are not permitted to tell anyone what "help" you believe is out there.)
I believe that it's important for people to be educated about the possible side effects of psychiatric medications, but to scare them out of their minds, offering no other alternative, is just downright dangerous, especially on this forum.
I apologize for calling you a moron, but I do believe that when you post, you are lacking in judgement. I don't believe I hurt your character, but rather my own.
- Laura
Posted by laurah952 on July 28, 2013, at 9:35:19
In reply to Re: Lou's response-Moarohn? » Lou Pilder, posted by laurah952 on July 28, 2013, at 9:18:50
Hello,
I'm writing to ask about Seroquel withdrawal, as my daughter is now about to completely stop taking it. She's on 25 mg right now, and will stop when next we see her pdoc. She will then be off all medications.
She just stopped Prozac, which was used briefly to lessen the side effects of withdrawing from Zoloft. It worked well, and she claims that she's just about "back to normal". I do see some motivation issues, and she's just a little less outgoing than before she became depressed, but she's made incredible progress.
Does anyone know if other medications are sometimes used to lessen the withdrawal from Seroquel?
Once she's completely off all meds, I will be watching her very closely for any signs of recurring depression and/or mood swings. She will also continue with weekly therapy.
This is all so scary, as she claims to have been depressed for a couple of years, and I didn't notice at all.
Thanks,
Laura
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 28, 2013, at 10:36:24
In reply to Re: Lou's response-Moarohn?, posted by laurah952 on July 28, 2013, at 9:35:19
> Hello,
>
> I'm writing to ask about Seroquel withdrawal, as my daughter is now about to completely stop taking it. She's on 25 mg right now, and will stop when next we see her pdoc. She will then be off all medications.
>
> She just stopped Prozac, which was used briefly to lessen the side effects of withdrawing from Zoloft. It worked well, and she claims that she's just about "back to normal". I do see some motivation issues, and she's just a little less outgoing than before she became depressed, but she's made incredible progress.
>
> Does anyone know if other medications are sometimes used to lessen the withdrawal from Seroquel?
>
> Once she's completely off all meds, I will be watching her very closely for any signs of recurring depression and/or mood swings. She will also continue with weekly therapy.
>
> This is all so scary, as she claims to have been depressed for a couple of years, and I didn't notice at all.
>
> Thanks,
> Laura(just trying to help keep the subject line focused on the poster asking for help)
Posted by Twinleaf on July 28, 2013, at 10:37:52
In reply to Re: Lou's response-Moarohn?, posted by laurah952 on July 28, 2013, at 9:35:19
Withdrawal from the antipsychotic group of medications can be problem-free, but is sometimes difficult. If your daughter develops increased distress or anxiety, it could be due to the changes in serotonin and dopamine metabolism caused by the quietapine. It would just mean that you need to go slower, perhaps much slower, with the withdrawal. At the moment, much more is known about benzo withdrawal than AP withdrawal.
It's wonderful how well your daughter is doing, and you also deserve so much credit for the wonderful judgement you have shown in helping her. I do hope it continues to go well.
Posted by SLS on July 28, 2013, at 11:23:12
In reply to Lou's reply-psychiatric drugs and death- » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on July 28, 2013, at 7:59:31
Lou Pilder has not been able to verify his claim that 42,000 people in the world died last year because a psychotropic drug killed them. It is not a generally accepted number.
There are quite a few things to be considered in evaluating the article cited by Lou Pilder. I have only skimmed through it, but I am left with the impression that they do a good job of presenting the work of others out of context. I am not prepared to present a detailed line-by-line scrutiny of the article. Perhaps someone would like to identify a point of contention to look at?
There is truth to be found in the literature that Timour et al. cite to bolster their arguments. I just don't like the way they weave the citations they choose into the story they want to write.
No time.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on July 28, 2013, at 11:26:48
In reply to Re: Lou's response-Moarohn? » laurah952, posted by Twinleaf on July 28, 2013, at 10:37:52
> Withdrawal from the antipsychotic group of medications can be problem-free, but is sometimes difficult. If your daughter develops increased distress or anxiety, it could be due to the changes in serotonin and dopamine metabolism caused by the quietapine. It would just mean that you need to go slower, perhaps much slower, with the withdrawal. At the moment, much more is known about benzo withdrawal than AP withdrawal.
>
> It's wonderful how well your daughter is doing, and you also deserve so much credit for the wonderful judgement you have shown in helping her. I do hope it continues to go well.I agree with Twinleaf.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 28, 2013, at 13:22:11
In reply to Re: Lou's response-Moarohn? » Lou Pilder, posted by laurah952 on July 28, 2013, at 9:18:50
> Friends, I am trying to save lives here and prevent life-ruining conditions and addictions.
>
> Lou, perhaps you are trying to help in your own way, but have you considered it even remotely possible that in any way someone severely depressed or psychotic and highly suicidal may have read your posts, regarded them as absolute truth, and terrified them into avoiding psychiatric medications, only to end up not seeking help at all? What might that have done to someone who really needed to see a psychiatrist? Could they have committed suicide, believing that there is no help for them? (as you state that you are not permitted to tell anyone what "help" you believe is out there.)
>
> I believe that it's important for people to be educated about the possible side effects of psychiatric medications, but to scare them out of their minds, offering no other alternative, is just downright dangerous, especially on this forum.
>
> I apologize for calling you a moron, but I do believe that when you post, you are lacking in judgement. I don't believe I hurt your character, but rather my own.
>
> - LauraL,
You wrote,
[...you are not permitted to tell anyone what "help" you believe is out there...]
The prohibitions posted to me here by Mr Hsiung prevent me from posting what IMHHHHO could save lives, prevent life-ruining conditions and give people in addiction a way to be free from the slavery of the drug(s) that they re addicted to.
What has been revealed to me comes from a Jewish perspective as revealed to me that is prohibited for me to post here due to those prohibitions posted to me here by Mr Hsiung. It is a path to follow that delivers one from captivity and leads one to a Promised Land. For in the beginning, it has been revealed to me that our first parents were in Paradise, and that we can rejoin them in that state, now. I am prohibited to post here how one can enter a new realm that has no depression, addiction, pain, tears or death. This is accomplished by receiving a power to be able to overcome. Overcome all things, overcome depression, addiction and death.
And when I had an encounter with a Rider on a white horse, He said to me, "Man shall not live by bread alone."
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 28, 2013, at 14:02:19
In reply to 14yo daughter - bi-polar, not MDD - new info HELP, posted by SLS on July 28, 2013, at 11:23:12
> Lou Pilder has not been able to verify his claim that 42,000 people in the world died last year because a psychotropic drug killed them. It is not a generally accepted number.
>
> There are quite a few things to be considered in evaluating the article cited by Lou Pilder. I have only skimmed through it, but I am left with the impression that they do a good job of presenting the work of others out of context. I am not prepared to present a detailed line-by-line scrutiny of the article. Perhaps someone would like to identify a point of contention to look at?
>
> There is truth to be found in the literature that Timour et al. cite to bolster their arguments. I just don't like the way they weave the citations they choose into the story they want to write.
>
> No time.
>
>
> - ScottFriends,
The question is if it is {generally accepted}. That can be shown by showing people that accept the 42000 as the number killed by psychiatric drugs last year. There are many, ways that psychotropic drugs can kill. One way has been posted about here as to that the drugs can cause heart failure and sudden death. I could show many other ways that the drugs can kill, such as agranulocytosis, a potentially fatal blood disorder, or liver failure and kidney failure and much more. This can be shown by research done that is published.
But to see who accepts the 42000, you can do a search such as [psychiatric drugs, number of deaths, 42000, DR Mercola] and see that there are those that accept the number. I think that if anyone wants to show that the number is not generally accepted, that they need to show that others in the field do not accept the number. If anyone can post such, I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly, for I have never seen the number disputed by anyone in the field. In fact, I have seen much higher numbers, and I agree with the higher number for not all deaths from these drugs are reported.
But being as it may be, there are life-ruining conditions that can be caused by the drugs.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on July 28, 2013, at 16:00:48
In reply to Lou's reply-psychiatric drugs and death- » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on July 28, 2013, at 7:59:31
> > > be advised that the number 42,000 is a {generally accepted} number of those killed by psychiatric drugs
> >
> > At one point, it was generally accepted that the world was flat.
> >
> > The 42,000 appears to be a pseudofact gone viral. It's like a rumor. More and more people on the Internet rely on it in their writings without knowing its source. Apparently, there is no data source nor scientific study to scrutinize this assertion. Whatever the number, sadly, some percentage of deaths associated with antidepressants involves suicide. Psychotropic drugs are often chosen for suicide because they are convenient.
> >
> > - Scott
>
> Friends,
> It is written here,[...The 42000 appears to be a pseudofact...without knowing its source...Apparently, there is no data source nor scientific study to scrutinize this assertion...].
> Be advised that the 42000 deaths just last year alone is a number that is generally accepted because of a great amount of research done to arrive at this number. The number of deaths is just for those that were killed by the drugs in the U.S. last year. Each country could report its own number of deaths from psychiatric drugs.
> Here is one research article that only covers deaths from psychiatric drugs from sudden deaths related to cardiac events. Then there is research in relation to deaths from these drugs by other means.
> Lou
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3349287
Friends, Do you really think that the number 42000 that is generally accepted as the number of people killed by psychiatric drugs is bogus?
You see, the whole is equal to the sum of its parts. So looking at each category of deaths and the number killed in that manner attributed to psychiatric drugs can then be summed to give the total number of deaths as a simplified example, for it is more complicated than that using epidemiology and advanced statistics and causation associated with pathology and toxicology and other academic areas.
Another way these dugs kill is by attacking the blood system and causing death by agranulocytosis and other related blood disorders that can lead to death. Here is just one report of such.
Lou
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1809216
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.