(TV) Misunderstanding %s vs Absolute #s / Risk / Daily Decisions

["Casey, Leo J" <CaseyL@VOLPE.DOT.GOV>]

I've been trying to stay out of this,  because it's essentially 
a philosophical debate; no one's going to change the other side's 
beliefs. 

But when you, or the Guardian, or whoever, start marshalling 
quasi-science and misinformation to prove that anti-depressants 
are bad and dangerous, be careful with the facts. 

I am familar with these cases of "some people" on anti-depressants 
committing suicide. It's pretty old news--the media covered it about 
5 years ago (esp. Prozac and other meds)---not sure where the 
Guardian's been all that time.  

The facts/science is that the **percentage** (not to be confused with 
absolute numbers!) of suicides or violent acts attributable to 
anti-depressants is extremely low. Given the millions of people on 
these medications, what would really be surprising would be if  
none or only a tiny number of people were affected adversely by them. 

Any product or activity has a risk of harm or death involved with it. 
Sure, there is a risk of suicide from medications, but risk analysis 
(and common sense) shows anti-depressants do infinitely more good than 
harm.  For every person who commits suicide there are 100's OF THOUSANDS, 
who don't commit suicide, and very, very large number of these are helped 
significantly. 

Taking your/their arguments as valid leads to some pretty ridiculous 
conclusions. A non-insignificant number of people die each year from 
taking drugs that are not anti-depressants, but we don't decry or ban them. 
45,000 Americans die each year from automobiles; we could save all of these 
lives by simply making driving illegal. 

100s of people are killed at US RR crossings each year.  These deaths could 
be prevented by building an 'overpass' at each one of the 300,000+ crossings.  
Wonder why it hasn't happened---because it's too small a risk for the billions 
(probably closer to trillions) of dollars such a solution would require. 

And if you think such calculations of risk or cost/benefit analysis are cold, 
morally reprehensible, and forced on us by bureaucrats, then you're more than 
a little naive; everyone--including you---implicitly (and explicitly) make 
decisions based on risk daily. 

Nobody is forcing anyone [OK some tiny percentage of the violent or psychotic], 
to take these anti-depressants.   

Don't get me wrong I am scientifically and morally opposed to the Bush Admin. 
in concert with big business irrationally, and dangerously rolling back the 
levels of pesticides, arsenic---fill in your 'favorite' poison---in our food 
and water because they say the risks are too small to be practical and 
" ..are a burden on commerce."   

Last but not least, those who are opposed to the wide-spread use of 
anti-depressants for severe depression, just what would you suggest as an 
alternative ----besides b-vitamins effective only for a small minority---
talking and talking and talking to a  mental health worker?.  No disrespect 
(as Bill Parcells would say), whoever's father came up with that nonsense, 
he's not as wise as you think, and he or a close family member has never been 
afflicted with severe depression---that 'sleeves' or 'bootstraps' mantra only 
works for the common, ordinary blues (especially post-coital  :>)  .  	Leo

-----Original Message-----
From: tv-owner@obbard.com On Behalf Of Joe
Thornton
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 10:22 AM
To: tv@obbard.com
Subject: Re: (TV) On a minor note... OT

Here is one of the reasons I object to glib suggestions about pharmaceutical
"solutions" for depressed people:

See today's Guardian:

"The modern antidepressant drugs which were thought to be a miracle cure for
20th century misery only 10 years ago are expected to suffer a second big
blow this year when the UK authorities will warn that some of them can cause
adults to become suicidal..."

I'm not suggesting that mental illness is not treatable. For a start, I
believe that a lot of people diagnosed as having severe depression,
schizophrenia or psychosis are suffering from deficiency of niacin (vitamin
B3).

What are the chances of a mentally ill person finding the right advice and
treatment?

--JoeT
--------------
To post: Mail tv@obbard.com
To unsubscribe: Mail majordomo@obbard.com with message "unsubscribe tv"