- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Interesting Article About SSRI's. HHS Director Kennedy vs Congress
Posted on 5/21/26 at 8:03 am
Posted on 5/21/26 at 8:03 am
The portion below that states "the FDA doesn't have a clue how any of th SSRI's work" is mind boggling.....
LINK
quote:
Republished with permission from AbleChild
In light of the recent mental health summit in which the Health and Human Services Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr, announced initiatives to reduce overprescribing of psychiatric drugs, AbleChild couldn’t resist a second look at the 2025 letter to the HHS Secretary from 26 Members of Congress “demanding” Kennedy rescind several statements about mental health.
quote:
Of course, these are just a few of the numerous mass shootings that have occurred while the perpetrators were taking the very “medications” the Congressmen and women are so eager to protect. But it actually is more than that. AbleChild would suggest that these Members of Congress should consider what is known and not known about the psychiatric “medications” they so desperately want to protect.
For instance, the Members of Congress may find it interesting that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not have a clue how exactly any of the prescribed psychiatric drugs “work” as “treatment” for any psychiatric diagnosis.
Further, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) uses the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, which was created by literally voting by a show of hands for each of the diagnoses in the book. There is no science to support any abnormality in the brain that is any psychiatric diagnosis. Worse, the long reporter “chemical imbalance” was thoroughly debunked in 2022 by Dr. Joanna Moncrieff who made it clear in her peer-reviewed study that the “chemical imbalance, “specifically low serotonin, is a myth not supported by scientific evidence.”
quote:
Even the former head of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Thomas Insel, had the integrity to admit that he had spent 13 years at NIMH “really pushing on the neuroscience and genetics of mental disorders…and I don’t think we moved the needle in reducing suicide, reducing hospitalizations, improving recovery for the tens of millions of people who have mental illness.” Yes, Insel spent an admitted $20 billion that Congress appropriated and got nothing in return except, according to Insel “lots of really cool papers published by cool scientists at fairly large costs.”
Now let’s consider the nuts and bolts of the psychiatric drug “medications,” antidepressants, that Congress is so emotionally attached and how the HHS Secretary’s concerns about violence associated with the “treatments” is worthy of serious consideration.
Let’s review the possible side effects associated with Prozac, the first SSRI antidepressant. Anxiety, confusion, difficulty with concentration, mood or behavior changes, amnesia, hyperkinesia, sensory disturbances, depression, dyskinesia, memory impairment, abnormal dreams, agitation, emotional lability, hostility, hypomania, mania, personality disorder, thinking abnormal, depersonalization, paranoid reaction, aggression, suicidal thoughts, and behavior and suicide attempt to name a few.
In fact, all of the SSRI antidepressants carry similar possible adverse events and the FDA black box warning for suicidality. This is the most serious warning the FDA produces before pulling drugs from the market. Certainly, these lawmakers must be aware that with the increase in prescribing antidepressants comes an increase in suicides among the nation’s youth. And let’s not be confused about suicide as it is very much a violent act.
LINK
This post was edited on 5/21/26 at 8:04 am
Posted on 5/21/26 at 8:06 am to lake chuck fan
This is where I parked my car full of guns and fireworks that nice FBI lady gave me.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 8:10 am to lake chuck fan
That article is poorly written with parsed quotes, assumptions, and no actual scientific data. But if it fits your narrative….
Posted on 5/21/26 at 8:12 am to Boss
quote:
That article is poorly written with parsed quotes, assumptions, and no actual scientific data. But if it fits your narrative….
I think thats exactly what the article is stating, the lack of scientific data surrounding SSRI's.
It's not MY narrative.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 8:15 am to lake chuck fan
There was a Time cover story on SSRIs a while back. Summarized all the science showing SSRIs do not work but have guaranteed horrible side effects.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 8:43 am to SaintsTiger
quote:
There was a Time cover story on SSRIs a while back. Summarized all the science showing SSRIs do not work but have guaranteed horrible side effects.
Big Pharma lobbyist working hard and spending dollars to keep this off the radar...
Posted on 5/21/26 at 8:53 am to lake chuck fan
quote:
Big Pharma lobbyist working hard
As opposed to little pharma?
I think SSRIs had a more societally damaging effect: the problem isn't your parenting, and your kid's behavior isn't their fault. Fast forward 40 years, and 3 year olds are expressing gender confusion, everyone has ADHD and anxiety, gets "overstimulated" and all that associated horseshite.
Prozac started all of that.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 9:07 am to LemmyLives
quote:
As opposed to little pharma?
I think SSRIs had a more societally damaging effect: the problem isn't your parenting, and your kid's behavior isn't their fault. Fast forward 40 years, and 3 year olds are expressing gender confusion, everyone has ADHD and anxiety, gets "overstimulated" and all that associated horseshite.
Prozac started all of that.
I agree with you. Not sure about the sarcastic statement about little pharma.
You don't think the huge pharmaceutical corporations that make and sell SSRI's don't have lobbyists in DC attempting to influence Congressmen?
Or you just didn't read the article??
Posted on 5/21/26 at 9:26 am to lake chuck fan
quote:
little pharma.
Anytime someone begins an argument with "big" (oil/pharma/tech/etc.), "big" is used to elicit emotional reactions and responses, rather than logical or factual.
What does a prescription for Prozac cost? It's $9 at Walgreens, and $0 and H-E-B according to GoodRX. How many tens of millions is Eli Lilly seriously going to spend lobbying congress for it? They spend way more money advertising drugs on TV than they do almost anything else. And that's directed at you, not congress.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 9:28 am to LemmyLives
quote:
quote:
little pharma.
Anytime someone begins an argument with "big" (oil/pharma/tech/etc.), "big" is used to elicit emotional reactions and responses, rather than logical or factual.
What does a prescription for Prozac cost? It's $9 at Walgreens, and $0 and H-E-B according to GoodRX. How many tens of millions is Eli Lilly seriously going to spend lobbying congress for it? They spend way more money advertising drugs on TV than they do almost anything else. And that's directed at you, not congress.
You do know there are other "anti depression " meds than Prozac, right?
So your position is that Big Pharma doesn't lobby Congress?
I checked with Grok:
quote:
PhRMA (the main trade group for big pharma) spent a record ~$38.2 million.
opensecrets.org
Top company spenders included Amgen (~$13.3M), Pfizer (~$12.9M), Roche, Eli Lilly, Merck, and Bristol-Myers Squibb (many reporting decade-highs).
opensecrets.org
The industry dominated lobbying overall, outspending every other sector. It was on pace for records early in the year (e.g., ~$227M in the first half).
readsludge.com
This lobbying focuses heavily on drug pricing, Medicare negotiations, patents/orphan drugs, regulatory issues, and responses to Trump administration policies.
This post was edited on 5/21/26 at 9:31 am
Posted on 5/21/26 at 9:49 am to lake chuck fan
quote:That is a misleading innuendo.
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not have a clue how exactly any of the prescribed psychiatric drugs “work” as “treatment” for any psychiatric diagnosis.
The same could have been said of Penicillin, Aspirin, etc., when they were found effective.
We actually know exactly what what SSRIs do. It's inherent in their name. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) selectively inhibit serotonin reuptake with little concomitant effect on other neurotransmitters.
A neuron (axon) releases serotonin into the synapse as a transmitter. The serotonin binds to specific receptors on the receiving neuron (dendrites/body), transmitting the signal through that neuron to the next or next group. Normally, the transmitting axon removes the serotonin from the synapse (reuptake), and signal transmission ends. An SSRI blocks that reuptake, so the serotonin continues to trigger transmission.
We also know a range of effects that serotonin causes. We don't yet know how or why specific serotonergic effects occur. Just as we don't know why two identically appearing brains can represent a massive IQ spread. Neuroplasticity, receptor remodelling, etc. are probable mechanisms.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 9:52 am to lake chuck fan
Rogan talks about this regularly.
SSRIs are all bullshite and based on pseudo-science. The entire concept of "chemical imbalance" is fake.
SSRIs are all bullshite and based on pseudo-science. The entire concept of "chemical imbalance" is fake.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:04 am to LemmyLives
The “chemical imbalance” messaging absolutely got oversold to the public at one point IMO. But people also overcorrect now into “therefore antidepressants are fake”.
Those are different questions: do SSRIs help some people? do we fully understand why? did psychiatry oversimplify its explanations?
You can answer those differently without turning it into either “trust Big Pharma” or “all psychiatry is a scam”.
Those are different questions: do SSRIs help some people? do we fully understand why? did psychiatry oversimplify its explanations?
You can answer those differently without turning it into either “trust Big Pharma” or “all psychiatry is a scam”.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:10 am to Bjorn Cyborg
The “chemical imbalance” messaging absolutely got oversold in the 90's, but people also overcorrect now into “therefore antidepressants are fake.” Using products experts don't understand well is basically a property of modernity at this point.
This post was edited on 5/21/26 at 10:12 am
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:13 am to TigerDoc
Anti depressants are terrible and way over prescribed. Just like how peptides are now. The problem isn’t being fixed with either for most people.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:14 am to DeBoar
I think they're overprescribed and good actually. How are they terrible aside from overprescription?
This post was edited on 5/21/26 at 10:16 am
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:18 am to lake chuck fan
As a medical provider who prescribes SSRIs regularly. I am sure going to pay attention to an article that starts off with this.
Having that picture at the start of an article has to be a sign that it is a well written and well sourced and peer reviewed article, right?
Although I am a little confused if I should be triggered by the noose in the picture. Should I send an email to the NAACP asking if I should be offended or can one of the boards SJWs answer the question for me?
Having that picture at the start of an article has to be a sign that it is a well written and well sourced and peer reviewed article, right?
Although I am a little confused if I should be triggered by the noose in the picture. Should I send an email to the NAACP asking if I should be offended or can one of the boards SJWs answer the question for me?
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:23 am to TigerDoc
quote:
think they're overprescribed and good actually. How are they terrible aside from overprescription?
It doesn’t address the root cause. Just like people who get procedures like lap band have an extremely high failure rate after because they don’t change habits. As for SSRI most people don’t change lifestyle habits as well and it leads to increased problems. Look at every trans kid or school shooter. This is a small group but upwards of 20% and mass prescription of SSRIs are pretty recent. 30% of all suicides we’re on SSRI and again mass prescription has only been the last few decades so that number is insanely high.
This post was edited on 5/21/26 at 10:25 am
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:27 am to WeeWee
The funny thing is there actually ARE legitimate debates worth having here about overprescribing, diagnostic inflation, side effects, etc. Then they slap a lynching for psych image at the top and instantly make the whole thing look like unc Facebook groups.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:31 am to DeBoar
I agree with part of what you’re saying here. Medication without changes in sleep, exercise, relationships, purpose, substance use, etc. is often incomplete treatment. Psychiatry probably has drifted too far toward “prescription as solution” at times. But the suicide/SSRI numbers are hard to interpret because the people most likely to be prescribed antidepressants are also the people already at higher risk for suicide in the first place.
Popular
Back to top

11






