I'm confused. If you feel anxious, you know it. It isn't just physiological. And if you were anxious, very likely sudafed would have made you worse, because it's quite stimulating. So why would you rush to go on a serious med for something you don't necessarily have? Anxious people are nervous, afraid, phobic, not just brain fogged. I would investigate further before going on a major antidepressant for something it doesn't actually treat. Maybe it's just me, but I don't have any question at all that I suffer from anxiety, whatever the cause might be. You gotta have anxious thoughts to be anxious.
I take Citolopram and have had excellent results. Just keep in mind that it can take 4-6 weeks for it to reach a therapeutic level in your body. This medication is an anti-depressant and this is what I take for depression.
Anti d's are what Dr's use to treat anxiety in australia. They work really well in the treatment of anxiety as well.
As far as if you have anxiety, I'm not sure but I'm glad your Dr is exploring the idea with you and still testing for other things as well. Sounds like you have a great Dr. The symptoms could be caused by stress, depression, anxiety, anything.
I dont see why people see anti D's as powerful drugs speically when there are so many other med's that Dr's hand out so easy. This is some thing I have been confused about for years I wanted Dr's to try my girls on anti D's but they said it was not a good idea yet I saw so many kids on catapress and other med's for ADHD. I dont get it, It makes no sence to me. I'f some one can explain the theroy behind why anti' D being seem powerful to them I'd love to know. This confuses me more when the person talking negative about anti D's is on a benzo.
The reason I say I'm gald your Dr is looking in to anxiety as a posiable reason is because when anxiety really takes over it hard to get your life back. If it is anxiety starting I'm glad your on a good start. I'm also glad you have a Dr that is not just saying oh it's anxiety and doing no other test at all. i struggled with dr's like this for years and I'm glad to finally have a Dr that does not blame everything on my anxiety.
I do know I have anxiety to an extent. I have also have panic attacks. The thing is that this does not feel like it usually does with my regular anxiety. I have had this Brain fog before but it would only last a few min and then it would go away. Its more complicated. This all started after I started welburtin to stop smoking. I know people experience anxiety in different ways and was told this does sound like anxiety.
Anyway this post explains the whole situation a bit better.
I know I have anxiety and I also suffer from depresion I just had never expriainced it in this way.
stopping smoking can increase your anxiety level.
The reason people say antidepressants are strong medicine is because they are. The fact the other meds you mentioned are also strong medicine doesn't counter this fact. If you need it you need it, but these are often given out when people don't need them. They usually come with side effects, can be very hard to stop taking, and can have severe unwanted consequences, as can any strong medicine. To say that isn't to argue against taking it, it's just for anyone to be aware of what they're getting into and to make sure the doctor actually knows what he or she is doing. Most don't really know these meds well because we don't understand the brain all that well. Nobody's even entirely sure why they work. In medicine, it's always best to be cautious, but as I say, when you need it you need it.
It does sound like you suffer from anxiety. Didn't know it from your original post. Whether this med will work or not can't be known; meds affect everyone differently. It's trial and error. Brain fog is common with anxiety sufferers and depression sufferers when they're under a lot of anxiety or depression, but you never know, there can always be physiological causes. In your case, let your doc follow up, but if you do want to take these kinds of meds, psychiatrists who specialize in medication are better than regular docs in handling their difficulties and gauging how well they're working, though many psychiatrists don't do their homework, either. That's why you have to do your own.
Oh, wanted to say, also, that brain fog is also a common side effect of meds. Wellbutrin is a stimulating antidepressant, not usually used when anxiety is a primary problem, and it might have exacerbated that part of the equation, causing the brain fog.
But every medication has side effect no matter what it is what are the scientific reason for the anti D's being strong. I'm curious about what are the facts about anti D's not just oppinion's.
Ok well i think i will be able to enlighten you scientifically on the subject of anti-depressants.
Now the theroy goes that when someone is suffering from clinical depression and or an anxiety diorder it has been scientifically proven that their levels of Serotonin are lower than normal, and by giving anti-d's this will increase the level back to normal and hense improve their symptoms. Sounds straightforward and easy right. Well not necessarily, because what alot of GP's/PC doctors do is you step into the doctors office say your feeling depressed or feeling anxious and without a second backward glance they hand you a precription for a anti-depressant and this can be dangerous!! Firstly, they may not be suffering from clinical depression, which is an actual disease and is nothing like having a bad mood or feeling a bit low it is FAR more severe than that, it can be life threatening. Now if the person isn't actaully suffering from clinical depression or an actual severe anxiety disorder by taking the drugs you are giving your brain an additional overload of Serotonin which can and has proved fatal.
Giving children anti-d's is just as risky as a childs brain is still developing and by giving a drug that alters the brains chemistry you are potentially risking that childs future brain development, but only when a child has been properly assessed and dignosed should they be given these drugs. If a child is severely imblanced or is threathening or trying to take their own life should they be given these drugs See, it's all about weighing up the pro's and con's.
In a nut shell, anti-d's are Powerful chemical altering drugs of the mind and should NOT be taken lightly, Gp's and PC doc's can be influnced by drug companies to prescribe their drug, the more they prescribe the bigger the bonus for the doc's. This isn't right but money talks sadly and for alot of people they have paid the price with severe side effects that may or may not be life threatening. But saying this people are actaully ill they can and are a life saver.
ps sorry about the spelling, have just got off a 12 hour shift...lol
I think thats where australia and america is so different. Drug companies really dont have a huge impact on Dr here's we have far less approved drugs in australia. The australia government only aproves drugs with proven history.
Take the med Ivabradine for example It's new in australia. I'm sure Ivabradine has been around for fue years already because when i prescribed it thats basicly what my cardioligist said as well it has been proven to ONLY work on the sinus node. I been on several med's that are new here but are not new to people in other country's. I think americans need to stop listening to drug companies and stop being "lab rat's" tha'ts is for sure. That being said med's have to be tryed first by some one or we would have no med's. There has to be a better way that allowing drug companies to advertise on TV and radio. There are very fue add's of any form about med's here I think the only adds for meds we get is for cold's and flu's or hayfever and inproveing your performace in the bed room add. That's a dangerous add and drug and they don't tell men that either. Its up to the governments to make sure people are not being put at risk.
I agree some Dr's hands meds out to easily. Over all there has to be a lot of good Dr's and it's up the each person to make sure they stay informed and research the med's them self before agreeing to take any medication to be sure. That one of the reason I tell people information in power. You have the right to google or research case studies on the med's you've been given to see about possable side effect. Case studies or clinical trials can help but also people experiance with med's can help. Every one is so different that you'll never know every side effect of every med that just not possiable in the medical science. They are not super human being they are just trying to do the best for people to ease pain and illness etc and it can often be a hit or miss type of situation.
OP...the "brain fog" you describe very well could be one of the more common side effects of anxiety...depersonalization, or derealization. You can google these terms, and also search our site here for more info about the symptoms. DP/DR can be very frustrating and scary when one first experiences it...and often times, it isn't uncommon to run to an eye doctor, or the like...to see just what is causing the world around us (or OURSELVES) to look/feel/seem so weird! If you click on my user name and look under "journals", you will find one on this subject, with MANY wonderful replies from people who have suffered/are suffering from this. Just a guess, but I would bet that your "brain fog" is one of these symptoms...and if I had to guess which one, I would say DR.
The med topic is a great one...there will ALWAYS be controversy around the subject of "to medicate or not to medicate". As the other posters have explained, AD's ARE prescribed medications, and like any other medication....there are risks and benfits which must be carefully considered before making the final decision about whether or not to give a med a try.
Just a few things regarding AD meds...one...they are pretty well known to cause some significant side effects, especially during the intial treatment phase. Some side effects can be serious, such as an increase in suicidal thoughts. Also, most of these meds cause SOME degree of a withdrawal syndorme when discontinuing them....some can be pretty significant and debilitating. Also, there is also always a risk of a person having an adverse reaction to any new med....and some allergic reactions can be very serious, if not life threatening.
So, those are just a FEW reasons as to why these (or ANY) meds should be considered a serious matter and the decision to try a medication shouldn't be one taken lightly. As far as AD's in children? They are contraindicated. The use of AD's for children under 18 is basically just a NO NO. The side effects that adult patients experience are magnified 10-fold for young patients, with one of the most serious being suicidal thoughts/ideations. There are MUCH better ways for a child to deal with anxiety/depression issues than medication. In rare and very severe cases, medications are used, but mostly only as a last resort...and under VERY strict physician (specialist) supervision. The best thing you can do is to have your child evaluated and treated by a child psychiatrist who can recommend other avenues to explore for treatment.
But the thing is nine times out of ten a person walking into a doctors office will trust in what the doctor presribes them, although people are becoming alot more pro-active in their own care, there are just as many who takes the word of a doctor as that of God and will take whatever is thrown at them thinking that the doc knows best, this anit always the case.
Plus the whole drug company ordeal isn't just in America, over here in England the doc's are stormed by drug companies even under the NHS. Pressures to make targets and to potentially stop referrals to specialists because of long waiting lists, it uter chaos.
When you have a child that starts talking about killing her self at 7 you start to think it's worth the risk. I never wanted to medicate my child ever till she started talking about not wanting to be alive and trying to walk in front in car's. Yes many people have tryed to tell me she was attention seeking but they were not present they are not the person that has to live with her, that has the responciablity to make sure she grows up to be the best she can be. They dont live with the knowlage I have about mental illness. I still worry every day about my daughter taking an Anti D and other med's but I try to push my negative thoughts aside and remember that it's seems to work for my girl's. I have a VERY strong family history of mental illness and none of which have responded negatively to anti D's ever so there was a strong posiablity that my girls would be fine with it as well. I still want to take my kids off med's and I worry every day if that will be posible but when I see there smiles on there faces it makes the worry disapear for a while. Your not the one that had to hear to a child cry over everything since she was 1y or deal with other child that could not stop threatening to kill people and attacking people and so scared she was the going to kill some one so she kept us at arms length ever since she was 1y. You not the one that has to look at photo's and see none with a smile till after the med's she has been put on.
Dont ever take medicatation for granted for sure but dont brush it off JUST because other people have bad things to say about it. Speically if thoes bad things are generic and have no real fact to back them up. Some time you have to have a leap of faith if your suffering bad enough.
Do you know what a doc would usualy do for DR or DP?
DR and DP are a symptom and not an illness by them self so the best way to deal with them is to figure out what's causing the symptoms.
I never like getting into differences with nursegirl, she's one of my faves, but it's not true it's been scientifically proven that people with depression or anxiety have less serotonin than anyone else. Some pharmaceutical companies have claimed that, but there is no scientific proof of it. Nor do antidepressants make more serotonin, they just allow it to be used longer before the body breaks it down for disposal. Think of it more as using serotonin more intensely than making more of it. As for the dangers of antidepressants, this is a very hotly debated subject because, while these meds were developed for short term use for adults only, they have been used long-term and for children. They weren't tested for long-term use or for use in children. Nor is there really good data on these subjects, but good enough to warn against using it in anyone younger than 18. Not that they should never be used, but that they should be used with great caution in a developing brain, and can cause suicidal and violent thoughts in children and adults. On the other hand, some people including children are suicidal without the meds. It's a very complicated issue, and one we can't solve and one science hasn't solved, but as I said before, given where we are in an infant state of medical knowledge, sometimes when you need something you need it, it's the best we can do, in both children and adults. If you have a psychiatrist who is watching closely, most problems can be seen and dealt with, but most psychiatrists, particularly those who take insurance, don't watch closely. But my psychiatrist said something very interesting the last time I saw her -- she said that most times, her patients don't tell her they're having problems with their meds, that there have been significant changes. So it's important patients and parents of young patients keep a good watch on themselves, too. And to everyone a positive outcome.
I agree with everything you said.......Proof only come with time and some time we need to take a chance because if we waited till we knew 100% about the brain billion of people could have suffered more than needed. medical science is a lot of luck a lot of the time while looking for an answer to one illness they find posiable answers for other illness's It's about observation more then about certainty. They obsesve changes in rats and or other animals and then when there is good outcomes there allowed to use human's. This will never be 100% safe there will always be side effect's........ thats life. I think people expect too much certainty with medical science.
This is such a black and white subject and everyone is entitled to their opinion but personally as a person who works on a daily basis with the mentally ill, i have seen things that would make nightmares seem like a fairy tale and was caused by medication. Some patients suffer terrible side effects that actually are worse than the original illness, then it can be an ordeal trying to find that medication or combo that works for the patient so that they can go back to functioning on a similar basis to that when they arrived.
I would like you to have a look at the history of Psychiatry as i really dont feel you have grasped the seriousness of these medications, not just anti-d's but anti-pychotics, etc... plus all the other treatments that have been given over the years, ECT, Insulin therapy, water submersion therapy, Lobotomies...these were seen back then as cutting edge technology and were used and caused suffering and torment and death... Now we have medication that is seen as cutting edge but is proving to cause suffering as well and even death.
Plus even after a good result on a rat or monkey because of the vast DNA structural difference it can take 10years or more for a drug to be deemed safe for humans. It is not as straight forward as you seem feel it is.
Yes there is no certainly with these medications and that is the reason why you shouldn't take them for granted or use them on children.
Good thing you don't like to disagree with me Pax....cuz you won't have to now either....I wasn't the one who posted about the serotonin info. That was the other Nurse...lol.
Mental illnesses, especially anxiety and depression are not PROVEN to be be caused by any one thing or another. There are many theories...but they are just that, theories. I DO believe that the serotonin connection with meds is of significance. That's not to say that I necessarily believe that depression may be caused by a lack of serotonin, or a lesser amount than is "normal"....but I do believe that the increase in serotonin facilitated by the "reuptake" being partially blocked definitely makes a difference in some people.
To mum.....you said the following:
"Your not the one that had to hear to a child cry over everything since she was 1y or deal with other child that could not stop threatening to kill people and attacking people and so scared she was the going to kill some one so she kept us at arms length ever since she was 1y. You not the one that has to look at photo's and see none with a smile till after the med's she has been put on."
Obviously with this being a very sensitive issue for you, you are getting unnecessarily defensive. NO ONE here is judging you or your decisions that only YOU can make for your children. We are just trying to give you the very VALID reasons as to why these kinds of meds are contraindicated in children. You asked, after all. Like I said in my other post...medicating children under 18 with these kinds of meds DOES happen sometimes....and is warranted...again...it is just something that has to be WELL thought out and honestly....should be a last resort after other treatment options have been attempted. You mentioned your very young child having suicidal ideations....that was one of the points I was trying to make. It is actually pretty common that a younger child on this kind of med to have an INCREASE in those kinds of thought processes.
I understand that you only want what is best for your children, and again...none of us are judging you...just trying to present you with the facts. If you have your children under the care of a psychiatrist specializing in child/adolescent psych, then you're in good hands.
The best to you and your family.
I was not being defensive I was simply trying to say that when some one wants an answer and wants help for them self or child that a leap faith has to made sometimes. Medical science is not perfect but it's HOPE.
About the serotonin "reuptake" it most proberly became a THEROY because they were trying to find a med to treat one thing and realised it seemed to help other things. This most proberly happened in human testing but I dont know that might cool info to find out.
I dont think med's is a black and white issues at all, or least it should not be a black and white issues. If your sick enough to be demading help from a Dr and looking for answers on sites like this then a black and white prerspective might want to be ajusted. Listen and asked question, dont be afraid to ask about side effect, BUT also asked about statistic. Maths comes in to the equation as well. People talk about negative things all time but often the staistical probabilty is low. You often more low likly to get hit by a bus or something else. This is where the leap of faith come in if your sick enough and desperate enough and INFORMED about the treatment plan then some time you just have to forget the possiable side effect and hope you'll be ok. Most people dont get the extream side effect's thats why there called RARE.
Some time quality of life is worth taking a leap of faith for.
Maybe this will help, maybe it won't. For most of my life, I just took the meds doctors recommended or I didn't because I didn't believed they were necessary, but I believed they were giving me the best info. I've taken several meds for anxiety, but only after years of therapy didn't take. The two meds that helped me were imipramine, which stopped working, ironically, when I got upset over a relationship breakup. Ironic, because it's an antidepressant but I was taking it for panic attacks, and yet when an event happened that should have been dealt with by this antidepressant, it stopped working for my anxiety. Odd, eh? I was also give klonopin, and have been on it for years. Eventually, after several failures, we got to Paxil. Again, like imipramine, it basically stopped me from getting new phobias, but didn't do much about old ones. I was on it for several years, but the side effects built up and I tapered off. Then withdrawal destroyed my life. So I've seen both the upside and the extreme end of the downside of these meds. Now, had I had a competent psychiatrist instead of an insurance company hack, they would have explained what was happening, put me back on the Paxil, and either kept me on it or tapered more slowly. That would have probably saved me from the four years of hell that have followed and the inability of anyone to know what to do about it. I may still end up back on Paxil since nothing else will work. I was forced to learn on my own what happened, what was happening to other people, etc. because my psychiatrist wasn't giving me the info I needed. You will notice that some posters from the UK are saying benzos have become hard to obtain there -- the reason is that the foremost authority on benzo withdrawal teaches there, and they've decided the harm outweighs the benefits. Me? I don't agree. For some people, benzos are the best option, just not for as many as are given them, and they need to be told up front what they're getting into. I was never told benzos were addictive and that withdrawal can be very dangerous; I learned it on line. The same way I learned about the large numbers of people who had been badly damaged by Paxil. Yet again, I wouldn't ban Paxil, either, because for some people this is the best med for them and most won't suffer the worst consequences. Mental illness is incredibly debilitating, and isolating, too, and if therapy doesn't work, what do you do? At one time, they'd have locked many of us away and thrown away the key. Medication is potentially very dangerous, but for most it won't be. What we need is to know what might happen -- not every little thing that affected one person, but the things that have affected thousands. Then, if we notice it happening, we can deal with it in concert with our docs. It's not black and white because illness isn't black and white. There are so many ways of dealing with illnesses of all kinds. We tend to be biased in favor of pharmaceutical medicine, but there are all kinds of things we could all have tried if we'd known they existed before we climbed aboard the medication carousel. This is what I'd like to see -- integrated medicine. Problem is, it would be expensive, and would require medical professionals to actually be educated, not filled with propaganda about this being more scientific or superior to that when we really don't know if that's true at this point in our medical development. Again, I speak as someone who's only help came from medication partly because I didn't know about alternatives, but who also paid an extreme price I didn't know existed as a possibility. If I had known, I'd probably have take the Paxil anyway, because I'd tried most of the other stuff and had never had a problem with medication before. So it's not a question of this or that, it's a question of this and that. And again, to everyone a successful outcome.