3 ms·

It took us 10-20 years to find out about tardive dyskinesia due to antipsychotic medications and the long term dependency and withdrawal effects of benzodiazepi

It took us 10-20 years to find out about tardive dyskinesia due to antipsychotic medications and the long term dependency and withdrawal effects of benzodiazepines. Two entire classes of drugs that are now in common use, so it’s not unheard of. I’m not saying we should take Ozempic off the market but don’t be fooled into thinking that we’re immune to unintended consequences just because we did a few studies (almost all of which were on diabetics with controlled diets).

johncolanduoni 1y ago
At no point did I say we were immune to unintended consequences. Just that demanding every drug be used for 30+ years before you’ll touch it is not actually making an analysis of the tradeoffs involved. Also, the drug classes you listed are not great examples. Benzodiazepines don’t fit what we’re talking about at all: it’s common to develop tolerance and get serious withdrawal symptoms from a few months of heavy use. You definitely don’t need to take them for 10-20 years (or even the 8 years since Ozempic was approved) to notice the serious side effects. If Ozempic killed you if you quit it cold turkey, we would already know. Psychiatrists were not unaware of what happened when you took too much Valium back in the 60s when it was first introduced. It’s just that they (and society in general) had an attitude toward risks that is totally alien to modern sensibilities (and to be clear, I think it was bad). First-generation antipsychotic’s incidence of TD was strongly correlated with dose, which was strongly correlated with having schizophrenia and other mental illnesses involving psychosis specifically (as opposed to other indications like bipolar without psychotic features or major depression). Getting TD later in life but being able to live outside of an asylum (they were still around when first-generation antipsychotics were commonly prescribed) is probably a tradeoff many of these people would have taken, even if they knew about it.
- nomel 1y ago
  > Just that demanding every drug be used for 30+ years before you’ll touch it is not actually making an analysis of the tradeoffs involved. Your replies are unnecessarily aggressive, and you’re not reading comments in a charitable way, or keeping track of the usernames writing them. Nobody is saying this.
  - johncolanduoni 1y ago
    I also never said we were “immune to unintended consequences”. How charitable was putting those words in my mouth? Also not sure where your quip about me not keeping track of usernames came from - I responded to specific examples given in each individual comment. They just both happened to bring up benzodiazepines.
    - nomel 1y ago
      I would strongly suggest re-reading this chain, and your replies, and trying to take what people are saying more charitably. >> Also not sure where your quip about me not keeping track of usernames came from You said "neither were you", but that was djtango's first reply to you: > I wasn’t talking about non-pharmaceuticals, and neither were you And the most recent example: > I also never said we were “immune to unintended consequences”. How charitable was putting those words in my mouth? I didn't do any of that. It's actually completely unrelated to my comment and how you're presenting yourself.

johncolanduoni 1y ago

At no point did I say we were immune to unintended consequences. Just that demanding every drug be used for 30+ years before you’ll touch it is not actually making an analysis of the tradeoffs involved. Also, the drug classes you listed are not great examples. Benzodiazepines don’t fit what we’re talking about at all: it’s common to develop tolerance and get serious withdrawal symptoms from a few months of heavy use. You definitely don’t need to take them for 10-20 years (or even the 8 years since Ozempic was approved) to notice the serious side effects. If Ozempic killed you if you quit it cold turkey, we would already know. Psychiatrists were not unaware of what happened when you took too much Valium back in the 60s when it was first introduced. It’s just that they (and society in general) had an attitude toward risks that is totally alien to modern sensibilities (and to be clear, I think it was bad). First-generation antipsychotic’s incidence of TD was strongly correlated with dose, which was strongly correlated with having schizophrenia and other mental illnesses involving psychosis specifically (as opposed to other indications like bipolar without psychotic features or major depression). Getting TD later in life but being able to live outside of an asylum (they were still around when first-generation antipsychotics were commonly prescribed) is probably a tradeoff many of these people would have taken, even if they knew about it.

nomel 1y ago
> Just that demanding every drug be used for 30+ years before you’ll touch it is not actually making an analysis of the tradeoffs involved. Your replies are unnecessarily aggressive, and you’re not reading comments in a charitable way, or keeping track of the usernames writing them. Nobody is saying this.
- johncolanduoni 1y ago
  I also never said we were “immune to unintended consequences”. How charitable was putting those words in my mouth? Also not sure where your quip about me not keeping track of usernames came from - I responded to specific examples given in each individual comment. They just both happened to bring up benzodiazepines.
  - nomel 1y ago
    I would strongly suggest re-reading this chain, and your replies, and trying to take what people are saying more charitably. >> Also not sure where your quip about me not keeping track of usernames came from You said "neither were you", but that was djtango's first reply to you: > I wasn’t talking about non-pharmaceuticals, and neither were you And the most recent example: > I also never said we were “immune to unintended consequences”. How charitable was putting those words in my mouth? I didn't do any of that. It's actually completely unrelated to my comment and how you're presenting yourself.