Jesus Christ, woman. I just graded 47 finals with no essays and thought I was a rock star. LOLOL
Let me tell you about my alcohol consumption this week...and then let's talk about how much alcohol will be consumed in celebration of actually getting the grading done before grades are due next week...
(I have 118 left. Not that I'm counting or anything.)
Can you see my signature? LOL :drink:
My H felt sorry for the students I taught while pregnant.
This isn't directly related to the outcome of he study, but this quote from the study's author enrages me. “We have to be vigilant even if the risk is small,” and told me in an email: “You need to consider other treatment options such as exercise or psychotherapy."
I'm so fucking sick of people acting like psychotherapy and exercise are more preferable forms of treatment than drugs and should be everyone's first line of action. If the drugs work on their own and you are okay with taking them then MORE POWER TO YOU. I know just trying to work exercise into my schedule stresses me out enough to almost cancel any psychological benefits. It's been said a lot, but nobody tells someone with a headache to just massage some pressure points and try white knuckle through it. No, you take a fucking Tylenol and get on with your day. (Well, unless that person is pregnant, I guess! Then drugs are bad!). Not to mention you have other people warning you not to exercise too hard during pregnancy because you might lose the baby or stunt its growth.
But anyway, there is so much fucking stigma over depression and people act like it's a personal failing of the people who suffer from it. This guy can sit and spin.
This dude sounds like an asshole. He needs to do his research and leave treating patients to the clinicians.
It's all about risk. The risks of being in therapy are pretty low (no, not zero) so people aren't up in arms worrying that people are unnecessarily going to therapy.
But why does anybody care what risks other people are willing to take? I'm not talking about this study or any study really because I know it's important to determine and inform people of risks to they can make a proper risk/benefit analysis for themselves, blah blah blah. I'm talking about the judgment that goes on among individuals. Like if you are in therapy, you are really striving to better yourself; but if you only take drugs and don't go to therapy you are being reckless with your health.
Yes, I know this isn't directly related to the article, I am just explaining my extreme ANGER response to the author's relatively innocuous quote. FWIW I retract my sit and spin comment because I know I read a lot into his statement that wasn't actually there. lol
There's no reason at all we as individuals should care about what other individuals are deciding to do. I get why this is a hot button issue for you, and don't blame you.
But I work in mental health and am very interested in what will work for my clients and what the relative risks are, which informs what areas I want to be trained in, how I practice, who I refer to, how I advise my clients, etc. And I care about public health and about science.
Does anyone remember when NPR posted that article titled something like, "Americans don't read any more" and if you actually clicked on it, it was just a joke, but no one actually read it so all the responses were like "I READ ALL THE TIME HOW DARE YOU."
This was my favorite April fools joke of all time. It made me so happy.
I agree that we should further study this and know risks etc but the suggestion to exercise in the 3nd trimester pisses me off and I wasn't even depressed. I could barely waddle down the street in the third trimester and I doubt that sad waddle would have been enough exercise to relieve severe depression. I mean come on! They have to offer better options to women than that.
@tambcat I think the reason researchers and whoever keep talking about therapy being better than antidepressants alone is because too often doctors just write a prescription and say goodbye. There is evidence that talk therapy plus ADs is a better prescription. With this kind of evidence, maybe insurers can be persuaded to cover therapy. Maybe doctors will prescribe it so patients can have it covered etx. It doesn't mean it is best for you, but for sure, in kids, ADs alone are less effective than talk therapy alone and definitely worse than talk therapy plus drugs. And I am a pharmacist. I love drugs. But I have seen it in practice too. I have patients doing fine on drugs alone. But I have other patients that improved by leaps and bounds by both.
Try not to take it personally that you have a different path than the suggested one. There is evidence that eating certain foods helps colitis. I find those foods make me worse. Some people don't follow the pattern.
@tambcat I think the reason researchers and whoever keep talking about therapy being better than antidepressants alone is because too often doctors just write a prescription and say goodbye. There is evidence that talk therapy plus ADs is a better prescription. With this kind of evidence, maybe insurers can be persuaded to cover therapy. Maybe doctors will prescribe it so patients can have it covered etx. It doesn't mean it is best for you, but for sure, in kids, ADs alone are less effective than talk therapy alone and definitely worse than talk therapy plus drugs. And I am a pharmacist. I love drugs. But I have seen it in practice too. I have patients doing fine on drugs alone. But I have other patients that improved by leaps and bounds by both.
Try not to take it personally that you have a different path than the suggested one. There is evidence that eating certain foods helps colitis. I find those foods make me worse. Some people don't follow the pattern.
lol but do people openly judge and criticize you on a regular basis for not eating colitis-friendly foods?
And I bet only like 1% of the judgment that goes on over this in the general population has anything to do with insurance coverage and the implications that research on the benefits of therapy will have on it. The same goes for health care costs related to AD use and the risks inherent in it in case anyone wants to bring that up. Those are great arguments, but I just don't think most people think about it.
Oh I wasn't talking about regular people. I was talking medical community. If they don't have MD behind their name and your chart in their hand, they should shut up.
The only thing I have to contribute is an anecdote related to one of the study's limitations: "Limitations of this study include the use of prescription filling data, which may not reflect actual use. However, prescription filling patterns are the most accurate data source for estimating actual medication intake in large populations."
I have been prescribed and filled anti-depressants four times in my life. And I have never taken them.
But if anything, this would cause the study to underestimate the risks of taking ADs if some women who filled them did not actually take them.
I think it is really important to continue researching aspects of ASD, while simultaneously remembering that, in all likelihood, there will never be one specific cause. All signs point towards the idea that a variety of circumstances can trigger ASD.
I can see why studies like these are concerning. I think there was one about Tylenol use during pregnancy. It made me pause. And then when I got a massive headache, I still took one. I had taken some previously. As PP said, we weigh the risks to our choices. It's part of life. Lord knows, even when people say you have a very high likelihood of suffering a horrible death from an avoidable choice (see smoking, sun exposure), we still do it. It's human nature.
There was also an article out about how PCOS is linked to Autism.
Why is the medical profession trying to make women with PCOS and depression so terrified and guilty? I have PCOS and took antidepressants during my pregnancy. My kids don't have autism.
I know families with autistic children, one who has 2 autistic kids. Wonderful children. The mother didn't take AD's, didn't have PCOS, didn't smoke, didn't vax. So what happens?
Sometimes I feel like they are just finding something, anything to link it to instead of saying, you know what, we don't know. It will take time to find out.
Science progresses by incremental findings like this. There are very few true "Eureka!" moments where the understanding of something goes from zero to sixty in one study. So having a little more data about correlation is a good thing.
There was also an article out about how PCOS is linked to Autism.
Why is the medical profession trying to make women with PCOS and depression so terrified and guilty? I have PCOS and took antidepressants during my pregnancy. My kids don't have autism.
I know families with autistic children, one who has 2 autistic kids. Wonderful children. The mother didn't take AD's, didn't have PCOS, didn't smoke, didn't vax. So what happens?
Sometimes I feel like they are just finding something, anything to link it to instead of saying, you know what, we don't know. It will take time to find out.
Medical researchers don't really give a fuck about your feelings (or mine, or anyone else's). They care about science, and figuring out what causes things and what works to fix things.
If your uncle smokes 10 packs of cigarettes a day and works in an nuclear facility without any protective gear but lives to be 90 and doesn't get cancer, great for him. Doesn't mean the research that shows clearly that heavy cigarette use and nuclear exposure can cause cancer isn't really fucking helpful for other people.
But if anything, this would cause the study to underestimate the risks of taking ADs if some women who filled them did not actually take them.
The more I think about this, the more it makes my brain hurt. If a woman was prescribed and did not take an AD and then had a child with autism, that wouldn't underestimate the impact of ADs on autism. It overestimates it.
Right?
It's been a long month at work and my brain is tired.
ETA: I would be curious to see if there is research on which classes of drugs are more likely to be filled and then not ever taken than other classes of drugs. I imagine ADs might be high on that list. Also painkillers maybe too.
Misclassification could bias the results in either direction, but in general it would bias toward the null, because it would overestimate the exposure in the exposed group.
The problem I have with the reporting on studies like this is that they're almost universally alarmist. And as such, they cause unnecessary panic in women who need to take ADs. They also affect how doctors prescribe them, which is perhaps the worst side effect. An increase from 1.0% to 1.87% may be statistically significant scientifically, but it's certainly not significant when it comes to the decision of an individual woman regarding whether or not to take medically-necessary medications.
If a relatively benign article causes "unnecessary panic" I'm going to need the women to take some responsibility for themselves. And doctors should read the studies if they work with patients that may need this type of care (if you're an OB/GYN or MFM, etc.) If they are making decisions based on a random article, shame on them.
I think we are placing way too much blame on the media here and not expecting ourselves to be smart consumers.
What? You want me to actually use critical literacy skills? The gall!!!
I have taken AD's for years, though I am Currently off them. I think it's natural for us as mothers and also as patients to get our back up with studies like this, but I don't think we need to. It's good to find correlation and to have scientists work on this stuff, even if we don't like their findings.
The problem I have with the reporting on studies like this is that they're almost universally alarmist. And as such, they cause unnecessary panic in women who need to take ADs. They also affect how doctors prescribe them, which is perhaps the worst side effect. An increase from 1.0% to 1.87% may be statistically significant scientifically, but it's certainly not significant when it comes to the decision of an individual woman regarding whether or not to take medically-necessary medications.
If a relatively benign article causes "unnecessary panic" I'm going to need the women to take some responsibility for themselves. And doctors should read the studies if they work with patients that may need this type of care (if you're an OB/GYN or MFM, etc.) If they are making decisions based on a random article, shame on them.
I think we are placing way too much blame on the media here and not expecting ourselves to be smart consumers.
Of course individuals need to take some responsibility and not freak out over a sensationalized headline, and of course I assume that doctors are not getting their continuing medical education from NBC.
But individual consumers of healthcare should not be expected to read medical journals. Journalists should not knowingly lie, sensationalize, or misconstrue the information they're reporting on just to sell fucking newspapers. Just like presidential candidates should not knowingly lie to their fan bases just because it will make a great Facebook meme. It's happening everywhere but it's horrible and a huge problem.
If a relatively benign article causes "unnecessary panic" I'm going to need the women to take some responsibility for themselves. And doctors should read the studies if they work with patients that may need this type of care (if you're an OB/GYN or MFM, etc.) If they are making decisions based on a random article, shame on them.
I think we are placing way too much blame on the media here and not expecting ourselves to be smart consumers.
I don't disagree; but people are emotional, and easily manipulated by nuance.
Let's just agree that the scientists are not the perpetrators of this manipulation.
I'm waiting for someone to tell me I've overreacted and I want to beat them to the punch and say that I KNOW. lol. It just gets exhausting. I'm tired of reading over and over again that psychotherapy is better than antidepressants - in general, I'm not just talking pregnancy. Psychotherapy is great when it works, and so are drugs. Also I sort of LOL that psychotherapy as we know it has not been around for that long (some might say it's a trend - I'm sure this is a flameful POV), and it seems like people forget that. I really don't get why people are concerned about ADs being overprescribed but don't care how many people see therapists.
You're not overreacting at all! I've been battling depression for a while and made the genius decision to go off my meds earlier this year and tried my hardest to get by with exercise, eating right, and therapy. But it didn't work! I can't fight my depression without meds and it was so hard for me to admit to myself because society does such an awesome job at making people who have to take medicine feel like shit and it sucks. As my therapist said; if I needed glasses I wouldn't refuse to wear them and just hope that eating more carrots and squinting harder would work, because they don't. I'd wear my farking glasses so I could see.