Use to discuss topics unrelated to recent posts. No vax/anti-vax.
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Use to discuss topics unrelated to recent posts. No vax/anti-vax.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén
Oakchair
A 10 year study published in 2022 found use of any “antidepressant” increased all cause mortality by 86%(1).
This study replicates a meta-analysis which found that when adjusting for pre-medicated levels of depression the drugs increased all cause mortality by 49% for SSRI, 75% for other, and 26% for TCA’s.(1). This meta-analysis contained corporate funded studies and was of shorter duration.
The 2022 study contained over 220,000 people.
It contained several pro-drug biases/flaws such as:
1- excluded participants on “antidepressant” polytherapy
2- In figure 1 they show they excluded people who took “antipsychotics” after being exposed to “antidepressants.” Same with anyone who used “antimanic” drugs.
3- The baseline the 10 year study used occurred after 5 years of antidepressant use (table 1).
The study results were adjusted for these confounders:
“depression, age; gender; body mass index (BMI); waist/hip ratio; smoking and alcohol intake status; physical activity; parental history of outcome; biochemical and haematological biomarkers (apolipoproteins A and B, vitamin D, triglycerides, haemoglobin A1c); socioeconomic status (accommodation status, number of vehicles per household, employment status, benefits status, urban/rural status, education, household income) and self-reported long-term illness, disability or infirmity”
Results:
“evidence of a dose–response effect (Table 4) for all-cause mortality, with higher doses associated with an increased risk”
Table 3 results:
Use of any “antidepressant” increased mortality by 86% when using the 5 year baseline adjustments
Use of any antidepressant increased mortality by 223% when just the age and gender are adjusted for.
For comparison smoking tobacco increases all cause mortality by around 79%(3), and smokers generally have 10+ year shorter lifespans.
Another study that occurred in those 65 years and older replicated this new study(3).
(1) https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/bjpsych-open/article/antidepressant-use-and-risk-of-adverse-outcomes-populationbased-cohort-study/6AAA6943E55F8B08DD9E25155E72931F
(2) https://www.madinamerica.com/2017/10/antidepressants-increase-risk-death-study-finds/
(3) https://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d4551
(4) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9150905/
Senator-Elect
These Oakchair pseudo-medical posts are tiresome. This one jumps from “association” to causation without explanation or justification. From the abstract of study 1: “Further research is needed to assess whether the observed associations are causal, and elucidate the underlying mechanisms.” In other words, this study does not, and indeed cannot, show causation.
Scientific papers can throw up all kinds of results, and it takes expertise to read them and tell the gold from the iron pyrite. I enjoyed this Eric Topol interview of Christopher Labos on nutrition studies: https://erictopol.substack.com/p/christopher-labos-debunking-myths?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
marku52
Correlation is frequently the first step in cause discovery. The correlation between smoking and lung cancer (very strong) lead to further work which, proved, yes smoking causes lung cancer.
Effects as strong as this should lead to further investigations to prove that the correlation is spurious (Umbrellas cause rain). This is a warning sign.
Funny that the drug Cos don’t do that investigation. It’s like they know what they’d find.