Antidepressants in childhood: danger???

John H. johnh at faraway.xxx
Thu May 15 07:58:41 EST 2003


Ken,

There are only a few studies on this and for obvious reasons cannot be
conducted on humans. I'd say its a safe bet that most clinicians are unaware
of these studies and if they were then there might be less prescribing to
children going on. Parents don't have time for children anymore, let alone
troublesome ones. Make them sweet and pleasant, if they look sad give 'em a
pill. So along comes the medical profession with more pills for the kiddies
when in this instance the principle of "first do no harm" should have much
more relevance. If the condition is life threatening sure, something must be
done, but in children that is remote (suicide and self harm from depression)
and the choice of prescribing antidepressants is not one based on science
but on convenience. No need to think harder, no need to explore alternative
strategies, just give 'em a pill. Given the wide repertoire of available
treatments, on the basis of these studies (all show consistent effect), the
choice of anti depressant administration should be last on the list. I
wonder ... .

Good to see you still have a roof over your head.


John H.
"KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message
news:EHIva.80149$cO3.5308203 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Hi John.
>
> I expect there's a 'gradient' in there, that's not mentioned in the
> text you quote. You know - quit smoking, and in 8 months I'm 'clear',
> but I still have a lingering-longing for a smoke 10 years later -
> it's 'curved', not all or nothing - something to work with in-there.
>
> The thing that seems of first-importance is that there's an
> indication that the psychoactive substances alter trophic dynamics,
> which then leaves the neural architecture self-sustaining the
> alterations because the altered chemo-background yielded altered
> "biological mass", and the altered "biological mass" then governs TD
> E/I-minimization convergence 'abnormally'. [This's interesting - if
> it's so, then it should be possible to do comparative 'puree'
> molecular analyses that'd yield molecular 'portraits' of the
> "biological mass" differentials.]
>
> Further possibilities are  two-fold:
>
> 1. The self-sustaining outcomes =might= be the result of resistance
> to the TD E/I(up) that accompanies "rendering useless" [AoK, Ap8],
> which would be 'exciting' because it would present an experimental
> opportunity with respect to such.
>
> 2. It might be possible to reverse the dynamics, depending on the
> experimental results of 1 [if 1 is anything [reminds me of Letterman
> :-]]
>
> All this said, everybody knows where I stand with respect to giving
> psychoactive substances to Children. I disagree with such usage,
> mainly because psychoactive substances =do= alter trophic dynamics,
> and their becoming increasingly relied upon is probably a direct
> reflection of dynamics that are analogous to these that you've
> brought up, John - behaviorally-observable intergenerational
> chemo-altered neural trophy. The Parent 'needs' the Child 'drugged'
> because the Parent's being 'drugged' as a Child renders the Parent
> more 'sensitive' to a Child's 'normal rambunctiousness'(?) Hmmmm... I
> can see that this stuff goes on 'forever' like this. Rich
> food-for-thought you've served us :-]
>
> Cheers, ken [K. P. Collins]
>
> --
> "Schmitd! Schmitd! Ve vill build a Shapel!"
>
> "John H." <johnh at faraway.xxx> wrote in message
> news:3ebf283b at dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> | The below suggests to me that the current push to administer
> antidepressants
> | to children may predispose to depression in later life. Can someone
> help me
> | here?
> |
> |
> | John H.
> |
> | http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh25-2/126-135-text.htm
> |
> |
> | Research from several laboratories has established that treatment
> with
> | antidepressants early in life in otherwise normal rats produces
> behavioral
> | and physiological effects in adulthood that resemble human
> depression. After
> | neonatal treatment with antidepressants, such as clomipramine and
> | desipramine, adult rats show alterations in sleep, sexual activity,
> and
> | other behaviors that appear to mimic those seen in depressed
> patients. Of
> | particular interest here are studies indicating that neonatal
> antidepressant
> | treatment increases voluntary alcohol intake and decreases activity
> in the
> | serotonin neurotransmitter system--findings that are parallel to
> | observations in human subjects linking decreases in brain serotonin
> activity
> | to both depression and alcohol consumption.
> |
> | Four separate studies have examined free-running circadian rhythms
> in adult
> | animals treated with antidepressants in early postnatal life; two
> of these
> | studies used clomipramine-treated hamsters, the third one studied
> | clomipramine-treated rats, and the fourth study used
> desipramine-treated
> | rats. Although one hamster study failed to detect any significant
> effects of
> | neonatal clomipramine treatment on circadian rhythms (Klemfuss and
> Gillin
> | 1998), the other reported shortening of the free-running period
> (under
> | constant light) and increased circadian amplitude (Yannielli et al.
> 1998).
> | In rats, the researchers reported lengthening of the free-running
> period (in
> | constant darkness) after neonatal desipramine treatment
> (Rosenwasser and
> | Hayes 1994) and increased circadian amplitude and voluntary alcohol
> intake
> | after both neonatal desipramine and clomipramine treatments
> (alcohol intake
> | was not assessed in the hamster experiments) (Dwyer and Rosenwasser
> 1998;
> | Rosenwasser and Hayes 1994). These studies indicate that neonatal
> | antidepressant treatment, like other animal models of depression,
> is
> | associated with alterations in the circadian pacemaker.
> |
> |
> |
>
>





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list