CLASS ACTION - IMPORTANT - yahoo group

[future-recovery]

Someone from the yahoo group:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/SSR ... ages/27313

All,
For many reasons articulated in previous emails, not the least of which is causation and statutes of limitations, the prospects of success in a class action is not the best. HOWEVER, new peer-reviewed evidence emerges literally every day, seemingly. In addition, re: statutes of limitations, I am inclined to throw in a claim for human experimentation, for which no statute of limitations exists. This claim would be supported by the fact that essentially, hundreds of peer-reviewed articles on SSRIs from 1987 to the present day conclude with, in effect, "we have no idea how these drugs work, the scope of what they affect, or the long-term consequences of such as-yet-unknown mechanisms of operation, especially when administered to the still-developing brain and nervous system." If that's not experimentation I don't know what is. As far as the law is concerned, human experimentation hinges on informed consent. If your psy-doc was anything like mine, which I imagine to be the case based on the seven psy-doc quacks I have visited, your initial session went something like "I don't know you, or anything about you or the root of your problems, but don't even bother thinking about lifestyle adjustments (diet and exercise), just take these drugs and save yourself a lot of trouble." No further warnings of any kind, let alone that what's prescribed is in fact experimental, literally. On the flip side, when wishing to discontinue due to horrific side effects, "just taper off for a couple weeks"--after years on the stuff. Peer-reviewed articles now clearly prove prolonged and dreadful withdrawal states (dubbed "discontinuation syndrome, LOL). This gets more into medical malpractice, which we'd each have to bring on a case-by-case basis, but anyway the point is:

With just FORTY members, from ANYWHERE in the U.S., a class can be certified in New Jersey, where I am licensed to practice. The downside, is, as many are likely aware, New Jersey is VERY Pharma-friendly, as Pharma is among the State's primary sources of bread and butter. The statute of limitations is just two years from date of discovery, and I'm sure judges are rewarded in various ways for pro-Pharma holdings as well. But if we can get our membership in front of a jury, tearfully sharing our horror stories and the scope of conditions that ONLY emerged AFTER "treatment" (in rebuttal to "its' only our 'disease' returning), anything is possible. We know ourselves better than any Dr. who will argue "it's just the symptoms of the disease worsening"an opinion which, of course, is based preposterously on nothing more than a pre-prescription office visit that lasted all of 15 minutes!

So, if you're out there, please reply. No need to provide personal info, but if 40 people reply, I can begin to contemplate moving forward and/or soliciting a firm that specializes in product liability.

[Ghost]

Is the goal of this money? Publicity? Revenge?

It's really easy to demonize Pharma, but the sad matter is that hating them doesn't make you feel any better about the fact that you have PSSD. They are also just a bunch of people trying to do the best with their lives as well. The Pharma company isn't really a human's issue anymore, it's more of an political entity. If you worked for a Pharma company, you are just following orders. Running tests, giving reports, and trying to maximize revenue. Same with the doctors. They have been trained this way. Medical school is not easy, and they are not total idiots. They have families of their own. They aren't sadistically poisoning people. I don't want to defend these companies, and would never want to defend a bad doctor, but they don't know what they are doing in terms of causing us pain.

The money would be nice. Mainly for funding research. Publicity would be great. We need that too.

I think the above reasons are good ones for doing this. I hope hatred and revenge aren't the leading ones though.

It would be a very very hard case to win. I think a few more studies and experts would be needed. Worth a shot though.

[EricCartmanRJ]

I would never try to sue doctors because I believe most of them are well intentioned. I really have anxiety issues and this meds have been helping me. But the lack of knowledge of how they work and what it could be affected is very harmful.

In my case, I've lived a life of ignorance. Never developed sexually and for the past years, when I have been trying to discover myself, disturbing stuff emerges. I am not even sure about my orientation and I have never had a clue this could happen. And about 15 years late! I am 30...
I would happily try to sue big pharma, without a doubt.

[future-recovery]

I would never try to sue doctors because I believe most of them are well intentioned.

I don't think that this class action aims to sue doctors? Though I despise psychiatrists because they disregard the opinion of their patients as soon as the patient blames an antidepressant. Such a behaviour is arrogant , irresponsible, undiscerning and unscientific.
I can't participate because I am from Europe, but I hope that everyone who can participate takes part in the class action.
The awareness of PSSD would increase. This could lead to more research automatically.
Everyone who wants to participate should leave a message in the yahoo group.

[EricCartmanRJ]

Sorry, I hadn't read the whole text. Just took a quick view in Ghost's reply and read something about doctors. Then I shared my view about it.

[fasttrack1982]

I am in favor, and willing to participate in any attempts to organize people with PSSD be it a class action lawsuit, a research study, or a foundation similar to that of Post Finasteride Syndrome.

[Maldoror]

As someone said already this class action is towards Big-Pharma not doctors.

But to suggest, as Ghost said, that doctor are not guilty is ludicrous. In my view they're as responsible as Big Pharma, possibly even more.

The way they practice medicine leads to iatrogenic harms. They are the ones who decided to forget that all drugs are poisons, whether you decide to call it medicine or not. They're the ones who immediately reject every suggestion by the patient that the drugs they're on caused X or Y. They're the ones who don't report the patients complaints to the responsible agencies and worse than that, don't even inform the patient that he can do it himself/herself. They're the ones who blindly accept the "state of the art", the status quo, the "guidelines" without critically thinking about them. They're the ones who reject to even consider the opinion of dissident voices. How many of them have read Robert Whitaker, David Healy, Joanna Moncrieff, Peter Gotzsche?

It's totally irrelevant if the way they practice medicine is due to not caring or due to cognitive dissonance, the end result is the same.

[fasttrack1982]

well said Maldoror. The arrogance that these doctors exhibit when they dismiss our symptoms in sickening, and unscientific.

[Ghost]

As someone said already this class action is towards Big-Pharma not doctors.

But to suggest, as Ghost said, that doctor are not guilty is ludicrous. In my view they're as responsible as Big Pharma, possibly even more.

The way they practice medicine leads to iatrogenic harms. They are the ones who decided to forget that all drugs are poisons, whether you decide to call it medicine or not. They're the ones who immediately reject every suggestion by the patient that the drugs they're on caused X or Y. They're the ones who don't report the patients complaints to the responsible agencies and worse than that, don't even inform the patient that he can do it himself/herself. They're the ones who blindly accept the "state of the art", the status quo, the "guidelines" without critically thinking about them. They're the ones who reject to even consider the opinion of dissident voices. How many of them have read Robert Whitaker, David Healy, Joanna Moncrieff, Peter Gotzsche?

It's totally irrelevant if the way they practice medicine is due to not caring or due to cognitive dissonance, the end result is the same.

I still don't think it's fair to categorize a whole profession or specialty as ignorant or careless. I don't believe that anyone in the entire system is trying to cause pain. Doctors may be close-minded regarding PSSD, but I think much of that comes from reading studies that tell them that Depression is causing all of this for us. They honestly believe that we are victims of depression, and unfortunately, they have a lot of literature to back that view up.

As in all fields of medicine and science, there are majority and minority opinions. I know that many doctors think that Healy is a quack. This is sad, because he is someone who sides with us. It's unfortunate that PSSD is currently a minority opinion. I've battled with this extensively with my therapists and doctors, but it never resolves anything. My anger doesn't make me think less of them personally.

Finally, these drugs are not all poisons. Did you know that before psychiatric drugs over half of institutionalized Americans were mentally ill? The 20th century saw some amazing drugs come from it. Many lives have been saved by SSRIs. Sadly, many have been ruined too.

I think it's important to look at all sides of this argument. I am very mad I was given Lexapro, but I can see why it happened. I also don't want to hold grudges or resentment, because I am already in enough pain without these feelings.

[Maldoror]

Ghost:

I was talking more broadly, not only of psychiatry. And many doctors agree with me, many of them educated in the best medical colleges and with great CVs. If the benefits of drugs and treatments are being grossly overstated and the harms are being grossly under-reported how can we take rational decisions about treatments? We can't.

Take Marcia Angell's quote, for instance: "“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” -- Marcia Angell (editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine)

And just yesterday: 'Dr Aseem Malhotra, an NHS cardiologist and a trustee of the King’s Fund health think tank, claims there is “a systemic lack of transparency in the information being given to doctors to prescribe medication, in terms of the benefits of drugs being grossly exaggerated and their side effects under reported in studies”.
“We need a cultural shift towards de-prescribing – and full access to the raw data from clinical trials for independent scrutiny, as this will encourage pharma sponsored research to be conducted at a higher ethical level,” he said, adding that until then “I personally regard all industry sponsored studies as marketing until proven otherwise”.'

Now, I think doctors are guilty because they're the ones who are in a privileged position to understand what's going on and demand change. Are we expecting the average Joe to read about ghostwriting, publication bias, etc, etc? They are the ones who are making clinical decisions knowing that there's a high likelihood studies exist showing no benefits of said treatment are hidden in a drawer somewhere. What's scientific about this? Why aren't they demanding change, aside from some exceptions like Ben Goldacre? Either they don't know about it (ignorant) or they don't care (negligent).