Posted by Racer on June 7, 2005, at 12:30:29
In reply to Re: Side effects » Larry Hoover, posted by Jakeman on June 7, 2005, at 12:19:18
I just read a couple of journal articles where psychiatrists are starting to look, not at "medication response", but at quality of life. That doesn't mean our own psychiatrists are going to start behaving as though we're, you know, Real People; or that they'll suddenly start asking us if we feel as though the "side effects" are worth it. It just means that the basic issue is beginning to come up in professional discussions.
I'm of two minds about the "side effect"/"drug effect" issue, though. The meds are designed to do something fairly specific. Anything beyond that is an unintended effect -- even if, as in some cases like minoxidil, the unintended effect is still beneficial. In other words, it's a side effect.
Still, the question of whether it's an acceptable trade off between, say, a sex life and remission from depression? Any doctor asking that question is a little bit confused. "Depression" is a disorder made up of symptoms. Acting on one symptom is *not* synonymous with acting on the disorder. Returning a patient to optimal functioning should be the goal, and anything less should not be acceptable.
Larry, even if we don't entirely agree on this subject -- although I don't entirely disagree with your point -- I do think that what you've written here is good food for thought.
xoxo
poster:Racer
thread:508986
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20050606/msgs/509084.html