What the FDA actually saidHow the news reported itFirst off, we all know of my annoyance with how the media reports things. So frankly I'm loathe to watch news whatsoever. When I do accidentally become aware of something going on in the world - something that intrigues me, despite my attempts to keep from knowing too much - I check the source. (Hey! What an amazing concept! I must be a flippin' genius to have come up with it!)
The FDA: "Although FDA has not concluded that these drugs cause worsening depression or suicidality [mel's note: although copy/pasted directly from the FDA's website, this is not a word, by the way], health care providers should be aware that worsening of symptoms could be due to the underlying disease or might be a result of drug therapy."
The media: "It isn't clear yet that the drugs actually do lead to suicide, the FDA stressed. But until that is settled,"
There's a very subtle difference in these two statements - and in the whole underlying message when listening to the media as opposed to reading what the warning actually says. The media implies the drugs are at fault. The FDA implies it's the improper usage and monitoring of such drugs by the health-care community.
Now, there are already a million reasons people suffering from serious disorders often do not get the proper treatment. Social stigma is one. Another is cost. While doctors will admit these are as physical as heart or thyroid disease, the care is still often not covered by medical insurance because of the diagnosis of "psychological". The meds, and often visits for follow-up, are tremendously expensive, and usually the total cost is responsibility of the patient. A big determent from patients actually getting the drugs, taking them on the proper schedule, and scheduling necessary follow-up visits.
Additionally, we often have doctors who are not specialists in the usage of these drugs prescribing them as if they were candy, and not paying much attention to reports of serious side effects (whether from the drug companies reporting possibilities or patients reporting experiencing them). We would never see a GP try to treat heart problems without referral to a specialist the way we see them trying to treat these conditions. And the lack of ways to accurately diagnose the problem or gauge effectiveness of treatment - most of the time the only determiner of how one of these drugs works is what the patient reports about how they feel - makes it even more critical to pay attention to what's goin' on with the patient! (Duh...)
I propose that if the docs were handing out heart medications pel-mel willy-nilly with the indiscretion many do anti-depression and anti-anxiety drugs, we'd see many people reacting badly to those prescriptions, too. And if the heart specialist simply said to their patients on the medications, "How are you feeling since you began taking it?" and the patient's report of "fine" alone brought about the doctor's determination that the medication was working properly, we'd probably see a lot of failure in those drugs, too.
At which point the FDA would finally have to step in and suggest what we all should be able to trust goes without saying: "Health care professionals should be paying attention to what's going on with the patients on these drugs, because improper care can be dangerous!" And the media would report, "The FDA has issued a warning that the medication you're taking to protect your heart may actually cause heart attacks!"
Add in the drug companies' irresponsibility in the way they advertise and market the prescriptions. Commercials for medications especially tick me off. I agree it's very important - from a common-understanding point - to demystify and explain psychological disorders and make patients more informed about their medical issues of all kinds.
However how often have there been commercials for drugs that just show happy people frolicking and tell you to "ask your doctor if our drug may be right for you!" - and don't even flippin' tell what the damned drug is used to treat?!? It's crossed a line.
Life in the disinformation age marches on.