Print

Print


Janet....

And how much DOES a prozac weigh? (grining, ducking & running)

Barb Mallet
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: janet paterson <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sunday, April 30, 2000 9:26 PM
Subject: NEWS: Reflections: Weighing Prozac, Once More


>April 25, 2000
>
>Weighing Prozac, Once More
>
>If the claims made by some researchers over the last few years
are given any credence, the drugs, despite their popularity, are
little better than dummy pills in driving away despair.
>
>The critics insist that as much as 75 percent of the improvement
shown by depressed patients taking antidepressants can be
attributed to the "placebo effect," the healing power of taking a
pill, any pill, and the support patients find in clinical trials.
They say clinical trials of antidepressant medicines have been
tainted by the pro-drug bias of the investigators conducting them.
>
>But a recent report in The American Journal of Psychiatry offers
a very different view. In it, a group of Columbia University
scientists review the critics' evidence and find it far from
convincing.
>
>The studies cited by the critics "fail upon closer examination"
to support their assertions, wrote the scientists, led by Dr.
Fredric M. Quitkin, a professor in the department of therapeutics
at Columbia's College of Physicians and Surgeons. And Dr. Donald
F. Klein, a psychiatrist and co-author of the report, called
claims that antidepressants are only slightly better than a
placebo "a clear distortion."
>
>"We are concerned that these conclusions may discourage depressed
people from seeking effective treatment," Dr. Quitkin and his
colleagues wrote.
>
>It is true that teasing out the healing effects offered by a drug
from the benefits bestowed by a dummy pill is a difficult task,
particularly when the drug in question is intended to treat
chronic illnesses like depression, arthritis or hypertension,
whose symptoms worsen at some times and improve at others.
>
>Complicating matters, depression, like most psychiatric
illnesses, cannot be detected with blood tests and produces no
changes in body tissue or other measurable physiological markers.
Studies set up to test the efficacy of treatments for depression
must rely upon more subjective measures: doctors' ratings or
patients' own assessments.
>
>The wiggle room left by such methods offers a perfect
battleground for competing ideologies: those who believe, for
example, that drugs are overused and promote psychotherapy as the
treatment of choice for depression, versus those who see
antidepressants as a lifesaving and underused resource.
>
>The skeptics argue that even in the best studies, antidepressants
are only minimally effective, and that doctors and patients often
can tell, by the presence or absence of side effects, who is
taking a drug, and who a placebo.
>
>"Maybe 2 out of 10 people benefit," from taking antidepressants,
said Dr. Roger Greenberg, a psychologist at the State University
of New York Upstate Medical University at Syracuse, who has been
among the most vocal critics.
>
>In their review, however, Dr. Quitkin and his colleagues could
find no evidence that bias accounted for the effects of the drugs
shown in clinical trials.
>
>Still, clinical trial investigators themselves are quick to
concede that the measures used to assess subjects' progress are
far from perfect.
>
>"Emotions are not linear, and trying to measure something as
complex as emotions on an arithmetic scale just becomes very
difficult," said Dr. Arif Khan, the director of the Northwest
Clinical Research Center in Bellevue, Wash.
>
>In a paper appearing this month in Archives of General
Psychiatry, Dr. Khan and two colleagues analyzed drug effects
using clinical trial data from 7,315 patients participating in 45
studies of 7 antidepressants.
>
>The researchers, who obtained clinical trial data from the Food
and Drug Administration through a request under the Freedom of
Information Act, found that of patients in the trials who received
the antidepressants, 40.7 percent showed a reduction in symptoms.
Of patients who received placebos, 30.9 percent improved.
>
>Most studies have found larger effects. A 1999 study by the
federal Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, for example,
involving more than 80 trials of antidepressants, found that 50
percent of patients improved on the drugs, compared with 32
percent on placebos.
>
>Dr. Khan called the effects of antidepressants in his study
"modest," but he said he had no doubt that the drugs worked,
particularly with severely ill patients who are normally excluded
from trials. "When you go out in the real world and look at
treated patients and untreated patients in Seattle or New York,
believe me, the difference is very large," Dr. Khan said.
>
>In the end, the clearest message of clinical trials may be that
the drugs now available to treat depression are effective, but not
effective enough.
>
>
>By ERICA GOODE
>Copyright 2000 The New York Times Company
>"http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/science/health/042500hth
-reflections.html"
>
>janet paterson
>53 now / 41 dx / 37 onset
>a new voice: http://www.geocities.com/janet313/
>613 256 8340 PO Box 171 Almonte Ontario Canada K0A 1A0