Hi Desperate,
additional Zybrexa information:
"For instance, in February 2006, public health officials in Florida ordered an investigation into why the number of children who are prescribed antipsychotics billed to Medicaid in Florida had nearly doubled in five years, from 9,500 children to almost 18,000.
The lawsuits filed against Lilly to recover the money paid for Zyprexa by state Medicaid programs due to the company's off-label promotion say the drug is being sold for unapproved uses such as anxiety and other mood disorders, sleep disruption, autism, attention deficit disorders, hyperactivity, and dementia.
According to the attorney general of Mississippi, about 10% of Zyprexa patients on Medicaid in that state, have developed diabetes. In fact, the health problems associated with Zyprexa have become so prevalent, that one class action lawsuit is demanding money to cover the medical monitoring of all patients who took Zyprexa but have not yet been diagnosed with high blood sugar, diabetes, or pancreatitis.
Children on Zyprexa are developing life-long injuries. At the annual meeting of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry in Washington, DC, on October 20, 2004, researchers from the Johns Hopkins Children's Center reported that atypical antipsychotics were found to trigger insulin resistance in children. The researchers evaluated 11 children who gained significant amounts of weight while taking the drugs.
Weight gain is a known risk factor that contributes to insulin resistance. Insulin is produced by the pancreas to help cells absorb glucose and provide energy. When resistance occurs, the pancreas tries to keep up with the demand by producing more insulin until it eventually cannot keep up, and excess glucose builds up in the bloodstream which can increase the risk of type-2 diabetes, heart disease, and stroke.
All six children in the John Hopkins study who were on moderate or high doses of an antipsychotic developed symptoms of insulin resistance, and three of the 5 children on low doses did as well.
The study's lead author, Dr Mark Riddle, director of the division of child and adolescent psychiatry at the Center, said, "The insulin resistance seen in these children was greater than what would be expected from weight gain alone, suggesting there is a factor distinct from excess weight that directly induces insulin resistance."
Experts say Zyprexa is poison for some people. According to Dr Louis Caplan, Professor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School, there is overuse of antipsychotics in patients admitted to hospitals. "These drugs," he said, "are often given in high doses to very sick patients in intensive care units or on medical and surgical units," in the February 21, 2006, journal Neurology.
"They cause symptoms and neurological dysfunctions that are a common reason for neurological consultations in the hospital," Dr Caplan warns.
"Old sick people with abnormal brains do not tolerate these drugs well," he says. "In patients with Lewy-body disease and some Parkinsonian syndromes, their use is a disaster, setting patients back for weeks," he warns.
When the FDA approves a drug, it also approves the labeling which explains the manner in which the drug is to be prescribed. While doctors may prescribe drugs as they see fit, its illegal for drug companies to promote drugs for uses outside the labeling.
However, as vividly evidenced here, drug makers do it and get away with it all the time and the leaked Lilly documents prove that the US court system is aiding and abetting drug companies in hiding their illegal marketing schemes.
For instance, in one article, the Times quotes a sealed document that served as a script for a company meeting in 2001, where a Mr Bandick praised sales representatives for the number of new Zyprexa prescriptions they got doctors to write. According to the script, more than 100 representatives convinced doctors to write at least 16 extra prescriptions.
The legal battle over the documents began in December 2006, when Dr David Egilman, provided the documents to Alaskan attorney, Jim Gottstein, and Mr Gottstein turned them over to Alex Berenson, a reporter for the New York Times.
Dr Egilman first learned about Lilly's illegal conduct when he reviewed the documents a few years back as an expert witness in the Zyprexa litigation. However, when Lilly was successful in the settling the cases out of court, Dr Egilman was forcibly silenced because the court allowed Lilly to continue to keep the documents hidden with a protective order.
As soon as the articles began to appear in the New York Times, describing an off-label marketing scheme called, "Viva Zyprexa," Lilly got a judge to issue a mandatory temporary injunction on December 18, 2006, ordering Mr Gottstein to return the documents and list the names of everyone he disclosed them to or discussed them with.
After he supplied the list, Lilly got the court to issue a second temporary injunction on December 29, 2006, to prohibit the dissemination of the documents by Terrie Gottstein, Jerry Winchester, Dr Peter Breggin, Dr Grace Jackson, Dr David Cohen, Bruce Whittington, Dr Stefan Kruszewski, Laura Ziegler, Judy Chamberlin, Vera Sherav, Robert Whitaker, and Will Hall.
The above list reads like a Big Pharma hit list. It includes about every well-known expert on the side effects of psychiatric drugs in the US, as well as the journalists and authors who have investigated and written most extensively about the misconduct of drug companies when it comes to the off-label promotion of drugs, and specifically Zyprexa.
Conspicuously absent from the injunction is the New York Times and the reporter who actually used the documents when writing five articles on the matter. Most curious is the fact that Lilly has never even asked the court to issue an injunction for the Times.
On January 3, 2007, a hearing was held on a request by Lilly to extend the temporary injunction, and to force Mr Gottstein to appear in New York City for a deposition within 5 days, as a prelude to charging him with civil and criminal contempt of court for publicizing the documents.
As a result of that hearing, several more entities were added to the injunction list including Eric Whalen and his web site at www.joysoup.net; the MindFreedom web site at www.mindfreedom.org, and the Alliance for Human Research Protection (AHRP) web sites at www.ahrp.org and www.ahrp.blogspot.com.
Once again, the Times and Alex Berenson were not added, and in fact, during the hearing, Judge Jack Weinstein said he was not about to issue an injunction against the Times.
By its own estimate in the media, Lilly produced approximately 11 million documents in discovery for Zyprexa litigation thus far, and has designated them all confidential pursuant to Case Management Order 3, a protective order entered on August 9, 2004.
When issuing CMO-3, the court gave Lilly the right to designate documents confidential, as long as Lilly "in good faith" believed that they were. However legal experts say the secret documents at issue here never should have been covered by a protective order.
According to attorneys in the case, in entering CMO-3, the court did not articulate the reasons why a protective order was necessary or set forth any criteria to use when determining whether a document was actually confidential and deserving of protection.
Yet instead of keeping the focus on why the 11 million documents were ever permitted to remain hidden in the first place, Judge Weinstein is allowing Lilly to hammer away at the messengers who gave the documents to the press, after deciding that the information needed to be circulated before more people were injured and killed.
In a January 17, 2007, hearing, Mr Gottstein was asked: "In this particular case involving Zyprexa, at the time you subpoenaed Dr. Egilman, had you the impression that Eli Lilly had deliberately withheld from the public and from physicians adverse side effects of Zyprexa?"
He answered: "Absolutely."
Mr Gottstein was then asked whether it was his impression that there were thousands of cases of harm to people from Zyprexa, while Lilly was in the process of settling cases out of court, and he said yes and that was why he wanted the documents out there "to protect people from this drug."
He had nothing to gain personally by providing the documents the Times. Mr Gottstein testified that he does not represent clients who were injured by Zyprexa for money damages and that his sole interest was protecting patients.
On January 25, 2007, in response to a request for Dr Egilman to appear at a deposition in preparation for Lilly to file civil and criminal contempt of court charges against him, though his attorney, Dr Egilman informed Lilly's legal team that he will refuse to testify under the protection of the Fifth Amendment.
A number of persons restrained by the injunction have obtained attorneys to file briefs with First Amendment arguments including the public's right to know what is in the documents and some people appeared at the last court hearing.
Ms Sharav and Dr Cohen point out in their brief, that they are not ex-employees of Lilly who have stolen trade secrets. They are merely a public health advocate and a professor who seek to share Lilly's own words with the public and they view exposing the information that "Lilly wants so desperately to keep hidden" as their primary public role.
Ms Sharav testified at the January 17, 2007, hearing, and when asked why she was interested in the documents by a Lilly attorney, said because they document the fact that Lilly knew in 2000, that Zyprexa caused diabetes, "from a group of doctors that they hired who told them you have to come clean."
"And instead of warning doctors who are widely prescribing the drug," she testified, "Eli Lilly set about in an aggressive marketing campaign to primary doctors."
"Little children are being given this drug," she said, "Little children are being exposed to horrific diseases that end their lives shorter."
"Now, I consider that a major crime," she stated, "to continue to conceal these facts from the public is I think really not in the public interest. This is a safety issue."
Lilly's attorney asked the court to strike her comments from the record but the request was denied."
[...]
source:
http://www.sott.net/...ps Ticking Away------------
From the New York Times:
"Zyprexa is the brand name for olanzapine, a potent chemical that binds to receptors in the brain to reduce psychotic hallucinations and delusions. Clinical trials show that in many patients, Zyprexa also causes severe weight gain and increases in cholesterol and blood sugar.
Documents provided to The New York Times last month by a lawyer who represents mentally ill patients show that Lilly played down the risks of Zyprexa to doctors as the drug's sales soared after its introduction in 1996. The internal documents show that in Lilly's clinical trials, 16 percent of people taking Zyprexa gained more than 66 pounds after a year on the drug, a far higher figure than the company disclosed to doctors.
The documents also show that Lilly marketed the drug as appropriate for patients who did not meet accepted diagnoses of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, Zyprexa's only approved uses. By law, drug makers may promote their drugs only for diseases for which the Food and Drug Administration has found the medicines to be safe and effective, though doctors may prescribe drugs in any way they see fit.
In response to questions about the information in the documents, Lilly has denied any wrongdoing and said it provided all relevant information to doctors and the F.D.A. Lilly has also said it did not promote Zyprexa for conditions other than schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.
In 2004, a panel of the American Diabetes Association found that Zyprexa caused diabetes more than other widely used antipsychotic drugs, in part because it tends to cause much more weight gain. But the F.D.A. has never made a similar finding. Instead, the F.D.A. added a warning in 2003 to the label of Zyprexa and other new antipsychotic drugs about their tendency to cause high blood sugar. "
[...]
Source:http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9F00E5DB1430F936A35752C0A9619C8B63
-----
Case I: Zyprexa leads to diabetes
Eli Lilly began informing doctors and patients of some serious potential side effects to taking Zyprexa in 2003. Zyprexa, a drug used to treat schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, was found to cause weight gain and high blood sugar, and thus has been linked to diabetes. Since the drug’s introduction, more than 20 million people worldwide have taken Zyprexa. As of January 2007, Lilly has made $1.2 billion in payments to 28,000 people who had taken Zyprexa and filed product liability suits.(1) Lilly could have notified doctors and patients of issues with Zyprexa at least five years earlier.
Eli Lilly started selling Zyprexa in 1996. Internal Lilly memos and emails show that the company understated the risks associated with Zyprexa for at least five years, between 1998 and 2003. In these years Lilly became increasingly aware of the links between Zyprexa and weight gain, high blood sugar, and diabetes. An October 1998 in-house Lilly document notes that weight gain is a "top threat" from Zyprexa. Lilly internal documents in 1999 show concern about Zyprexa’s side effects harming the drug’s "long-term success." In November of 1999, Lilly chose to disclose the less damaging data, that 30% of patients taking the medication gained 22 pounds, but not the more damaging data that 16% of patients gained 66 pounds after a year on Zyprexa.(2)
In 2000, Lilly had an internal discussion about a possible label change for Zyprexa. This label change would have alerted doctors and patients to the risk of high blood sugar. An internal Lilly panel advised, "unless we come clean on this, it could get much more serious than we might anticipate." Lilly ultimately decided not to modify the label at the time.
Moreover, Lilly continued to aggressively market Zyprexa. For instance the New York Times reports that in 2002:
"Lilly did expand its marketing to primary care physicians, who—its internal studies showed—were less aware of Zyprexa’s side effects. Lilly sales material encouraged representatives to promote Zyprexa as a ‘safe, gentle psychotropic’ suitable for people with mild mental illness."(3)
The Viva Zyprexa and Zyprexa Limitless marketing campaigns are under investigation by the government for allegedly marketing Zyprexa illegally for dementia and depression. Drug companies are not permitted to market drugs for off-label use, which is marketing for illnesses not included in the FDA approval for the use of the drug.(4)
When Lilly finally decided to disclose the ill effects of its medication in 2003, this change in position did not reflect a sudden rebirth of corporate conscience. Lilly’s studies showed that psychiatrists were noticing patients who were developing high blood sugar or diabetes while on Zyprexa.(5)
In 2003 the FDA required the addition of a warning label to Zyprexa and others in its class of antipsychotic drugs indicating their links to diabetes. In 2004 the American Diabetes Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, and the North American Association for the Study of Obesity released a report on Zyprexa and its peer antipsychotic medications. Amongst the findings was that that Zyprexa was more likely to cause diabetes than other drugs for schizophrenia.(6)
Lilly disputes reporting about its internal documents.(7) A company statement argues that select documents were leaked by lawyers filing suit out of a record of 11 million pages; the statement further contends these documents are unrepresentative of Lilly’s behavior.(8) In 2006, Zyprexa generated over $4 billion in revenue for Lilly, accounting for just under one third of the total revenues for the company.
Zyprexa has not been removed from the market. There are those who argue that its benefits exceed the risks it poses. This may be the case; however those who make such deliberations should have ready access to all the relevant information and the patients who use Zyprexa should be properly informed about what they are ingesting.
(1) Alex Berenson "Lilly Settles With 18,000 Over Zyprexa" New York Times, January 5, 2007
(2) Alex Berenson "Eli Lilly Said to Play Down Risk of Top Pill" New York Times, December 17, 2006
(3) Ibid.
(4) Alex Berenson "Drug Files Show Maker Promoted Unapproved Use" New York Times, December 18, 2006
(5) Alex Berenson "Eli Lilly Said to Play Down Risk of Top Pill" New York Times, December 17, 2006
(6) Nathanial G. Clark "Consensus Development Conference on Antipsychotic Drugs and Obesity and Diabetes" Diabetes Care 27, February 2004. p. 596 (Link)
(7) Robin Pagnamenta "Eli Lilly was concerned by Zyprexa side-effects from 1998" the Times (UK), January 23, 2007
(8) Ibid."
[...]
Source:http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/10/15/165958/44
Cheers
Alex
All sound advice thus far but what comes across from your post is that you are constantly over-thinking which is the cause in itself rather than a by-product of your life-style or diet/supplementation.
TBH The type of exercise is not significant in itself but if you're performing largely aerobic then try anaerobic and vice versa. For me it's weights, for others its running.
Adaptogens are useful but ashwagandha is more useful for stress-management for most Rhodiola can be more stimulating etc they are not all going to suit you, worthy of investigation.
Have you always been a bit intense/compulsive? or have any recent event amplified you response to events?
I should point out, I'm not a doctor, councellor or anything else, just trying to cut through to the roor cause.
Sentinel
Thanks for the reply. Yes over thinking in a way I can't control is my problem. I still couldn't find the solution. This is the reason why my brain is exhausted, even my libido has gone. That could give a hint about how serious my situation is. I just can't find the thing that will give a boost to my brain. MY daily supplement regime is so..2,4 mg piracetam, 30 mg nicergoline, 500 mg omega3, b complex 50, 400 mg vitamin e..I also use 10 mg zyprexa and prozac, these are not for mental fatigue though. As a reminder I was diagnosed with ocd once a time, And I still have some symptoms of ocd.
LongeCity
