How about addressing Big Pharma companys

How about addressing Big Pharma companys

This is a discussion on How about addressing Big Pharma companys within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; BREAKING! Adam Lanza Meds 'Fanapt' Responsible for School Massacre - YouTube Guns been around for a long time, but I dont know how long these ...

Results 1 to 11 of 11
Like Tree9Likes
  • 2 Post By noway2
  • 2 Post By Hopyard
  • 2 Post By lambo969
  • 2 Post By Clodbert
  • 1 Post By BuckNekkid

Thread: How about addressing Big Pharma companys

  1. #1
    Member Array mg27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    457

    How about addressing Big Pharma companys

    BREAKING! Adam Lanza Meds 'Fanapt' Responsible for School Massacre - YouTube


    Guns been around for a long time, but I dont know how long these SSRI's have been around. I think if the government really cares bout fixing this problem of mass shootings they should look into these New drugs that are being shoved down these kids throat..

    We have a pretty good profile of these shooters between 18-25 years old,and I believe were on some sort of meds that are considered SSRI's. Here is a link explaining more if anyone is interested

    BREAKING! Adam Lanza Meds 'Fanapt' Responsible for School Massacre - YouTube


  2. #2
    VIP Member Array cmdrdredd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    2,037
    It's too easy for someone to say they feel depressed and get prescribed something that has side effects like "suicidal tendencies, violent acting out, sleeplessness etc.
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
    -Thomas Jefferson

    Laws are restrictive but sometimes necessary to maintain a civil society. Rights are nonrestrictive but are always necessary to maintain a free society.

  3. #3
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,901
    For the last 20-30 years this nation has focused heavily on feelings, self esteem, and social equality. This can be seen in things in programs like No Child Left Behind, which would have more aptly been named No Child Gets Ahead, where the focus has been on raising the bottom. While in and of themselves these are good things, it has been at the expense of personal responsibility, accountability, and striving to achieve. Fixing the real problems will require taking responsibility for oneself and ones actions, which are virtues that need to be taught in the homes. Sadly these are not, and instead, so many just want to escape, even if it is through chemical or other means.
    cmdrdredd and ctr like this.

  4. #4
    Member Array Naufragia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Black Hills, South Dakota
    Posts
    467
    Too many PharmaZombies running around these days. Not many decades ago, a lot of these people would have been institutionalized to receive proper care. Now they just toss them a handful of pills and let them walk among us.

  5. #5
    VIP Member Array cmdrdredd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    2,037
    Yes, I think a lot of the online social culture has an impact as well. Facebook for example. How many young people gauge their worth by how many friends they have and how many likes a comment receives? That's teaching incorrect values. They may grow up to believe that if people don't like them, something is wrong. I was a Martial Arts instructor and saw this a lot. I always tried to teach the kids that someone will always be better than you, not everyone may like you, and they may make fun of how you look or act or talk. Don't feel discouraged, we are all capable of great things and greatness comes from the ones we least expect. I use the example of one 7 year old who wanted to become a doctor, but kids in school said they were stupid. I told him that there may come a time when the kid who called you stupid will have his life saved by you when he gets hurt and you should not worry about what he thinks of you or your goals. You should be proud of yourself and your accomplishments and have no regrets about your mistakes. It's part of growing up.

    Anyway, there is a difference between today's generations and those of yesterday. We generally stood up for ourselves and our friends, not because it was easy but because it was right. Values have shifted to taking the easy way out and having to make everyone feel included. It's all well and good, but in life we are not always accepted and many times people might seem to hate us. We need to learn to deal with it in a meaningful way, not just prescribe some drugs to enhance their mood. I don't like to say we are raising a nation of wimps, but in some ways it seems to be the case.
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
    -Thomas Jefferson

    Laws are restrictive but sometimes necessary to maintain a civil society. Rights are nonrestrictive but are always necessary to maintain a free society.

  6. #6
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,720
    Quote Originally Posted by mg27 View Post
    BREAKING! Adam Lanza Meds 'Fanapt' Responsible for School Massacre - YouTube


    Guns been around for a long time, but I dont know how long these SSRI's have been around. I think if the government really cares bout fixing this problem of mass shootings they should look into these New drugs that are being shoved down these kids throat..

    We have a pretty good profile of these shooters between 18-25 years old,and I believe were on some sort of meds that are considered SSRI's. Here is a link explaining more if anyone is interested

    BREAKING! Adam Lanza Meds 'Fanapt' Responsible for School Massacre - YouTube
    It is too simplistic to place blame on SSRIs. If he was indeed taking them there probably was a reason. All the warnings
    on the prescribing labels tend to be CYA for the manufacturer and have little real world importance.

    SSRIs have been around almost 30 years. There is plenty of experience with them and with them and combinations of various
    medications. They are also only one of many classes of medicines which can be used to treat depression, and
    some patients will do better on meds with different mechanisms. One size doesn't fit all.

    From the news stories, I think we have no clue to what extent if any the young man had solid competent psychiatric care.
    The old saying about bringing a horse to water may apply. Momma could have brought him to docs and then the kid
    could have been secretly completely non-compliant.
    Clodbert and Betty like this.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  7. #7
    Senior Member Array CanuckQue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Maritimes Canada
    Posts
    1,141
    Well, Big Pharma is mostly giving up on psychiatric research, so any new options aren't going to come as quickly as we'd like. So, old SSRIs are going to be used, and hopefully the clinicians will get better at prescribing them.
    spend more fighting Ebola than on Thanksgiving dinner. Be grateful it's being fought there, so we don't have to fight it here.

    As well, there are millions in potential patents possible for those with a tool shed, ideas, or creative loved ones to tell.. (and gumption) It's an untapped technology.


  8. #8
    Member Array lambo969's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    143
    The SSRI drugs currently on the market have received unbelievable scrutiny before they ever reached the shelves. The FDA requires that these drugs go through clinical trials - 7-10 years in some cases, with millions and millions of dollars being poured into the whole process BY the developers. If the drug fails the trials, it doesn't make it to market and the company has to figure out how to recover the losses. Needless to say, the drugs we have now work and actually treat a lot more problems than just depression. And the pharmacy companies aren't spending more on R&D simply because the process is so darn expensive. The disconnect occurs when patients receiving care do not communicate with their doctors or loved ones about problems they are having, and people are hesitant to bring up any obvious mood changes of the patient with any other party as well. In my opinion, there has to be a discussion about accountability and better care, not a revamp of the drugs.
    Hopyard and Tzadik like this.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Array CanuckQue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Maritimes Canada
    Posts
    1,141
    SSRIs work for only a small subset of the conditions for which they're intended to treat. In other words, only a percentage of patients who are deemed to require treatment will get benefit from SSRIs. This is why I say we need more psychiatric innovation.

    I'll disagree that Big Pharma is backing out of psychiatric drugs because 'the process is too expensive'. I mean, yeah, it's true. But it's really because they find brain research too hard currently. It's not like they're backing off on drug discovery in general! That's ongoing, despite the costs. Cancer, osteoporosis, etc. will all continue to get the drug-discovery process funded, even though the approval process is tough. What this means, though, is that psychiatric research is going to be funded mainly through government, university, and charity dollars. Our dollars are now increasingly a more important part of the equation.
    spend more fighting Ebola than on Thanksgiving dinner. Be grateful it's being fought there, so we don't have to fight it here.

    As well, there are millions in potential patents possible for those with a tool shed, ideas, or creative loved ones to tell.. (and gumption) It's an untapped technology.


  10. #10
    Member Array Clodbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    205
    The problem is that you can't prove that pharmaceutical drugs caused Adam Lanza to go on this murderous rampage. You can't conclusively prove that in any other case similar to this either. Because how would you know for sure?

    It's well-known that many of these pharmacological drugs do have side-effects that may result in violent behavior or suicidal ideation. But one still can never prove without a shadow of a doubt that a medication was the sole causal factor in driving a person to become violent. Especially when that individual took his or her own life during the incident. So while the media has jumped on the pharmaceutical industry as they search for answers to this latest mass shooting, we still don't know whether or not Adam Lanza would have committed this massacre had he not been prescribed antidepressants (and whatever else he may have taken) in the first place. In my opinion, blaming pharmaceutical companies for these violent events is as lazy, nonsensical, and convenient as blaming firearms. The definitive proof isn't there so we can't and shouldn't jump to these conclusions.
    Hopyard and Betty like this.

  11. #11
    Member Array BuckNekkid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Mississippi Coast
    Posts
    91
    BurgerBoy likes this.

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

blame pharmaceutical industry for gun violence is ridiculous

Click on a term to search for related topics.