back to list

Re: [metatuning] psychotic delusions of Andrea Yates

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

3/14/2002 9:12:22 PM

Jeff!
Such things make me so mad, i think i'll have to take another "Columbine
Cocktail".
to relax

I know someone who lost their house cause they were so medicated they
thought jesus would take care of their bills and just put them in a pile.

There is also the case of the real psychosis going on,
blood equals justice.

"X. J. Scott" wrote:

> OK, was reviewing once again the 2000 PDR on Zoloft
> which is manufactured by Pfizer. Zoloft is a selective
> serotonin reuptake inhibitor.
>
> Among its *observed* side effects:
>
> agitation, anxiety, insomnia, nervousness, depression,
> amnesia, paroniria,teeth-grinding, emotional lability,
> apathy, abnormal dreams, euphoria, paranoid reaction,
> hallucination, aggresive reaction, aggravated
> depression, psychotic delusions, suicide ideation,
> somnabulism, illusion
>
> So what are we looking at here?
>
> A highly intelligent and creative woman grows up, goes
> to school, gets a degree, doing well academically and
> becomes a nurse. Her career is exemplary. She is active
> in the community doing volunteer work. She has no
> criminal record, not even a single speeding or parking
> infraction. She marries a NASA engineer, becomes
> pregnant and decides to stay home with her child. This
> involves giving up her career and greatly reducing her
> social contact with others. It is common under such a
> move to experience some depression, which she does. She
> speaks to her doctor about it and rather than seeing it
> as normal, he decides she has post-partum depression
> and should be put on 125 mg of Zoloft. She immediately
> begins to display several known side-effects of Zoloft,
> including:
>
> anxiety
> nervousness
> depression
> apathy
> abnormal dreams
> euphoria
> paranoid reaction
> hallucination
> aggravated depression
> psychotic delusions
> suicide ideation
> illusion
>
> At this point, ANY competant doctor would immediately
> recognize that she is having severe reactions to
> Zoloft, which is not even surprising or unusual.
>
> There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that these
> sypmtoms were caused by the Zoloft. In fact, Andrea
> herself said that the Zoloft made her feel crazy and
> she did not want to take them.
>
> The competant doctor should then switch her to another
> drug, or prescribe psychotherapy, diet change, or
> social activity instead of the drugs, while keeping her
> monitored closely for the 14 days it takes the Zoloft
> to get out of her system (it is a very slow drug to get
> out -- read the PDR for details.)
>
> But therapy is expensive and does not profit the
> pharmaceutical companies. Insurance companies would
> much rather pay for drugs than therapy.
>
> For whatever reason, the doctors decide to treat her
> side-effects. The most serious side effects of the
> Zoloft are psychotic delusions. The appropriate
> treatment is to stop the Zoloft. Instead, the doctors
> made a conscious decision to put here on the powerful
> anti-psychotic drug Haldol. Haldol works -- whether you
> are naturally psychotic, or merely psychotic as a
> common side effect of taking antidepressants, it stops
> the insanity. But at a cost -- more side effects.
> Feeling detached from your body, unable to function,
> etc.
>
> At this point, having made a conscious and deliberate
> decision to treat the Zoloft psychosis side-effect with
> drugs, the doctor should have made every effort to keep
> a close eye on her and to inform her family that the
> psychosis they were treating was being caused by the
> Zoloft and so that under no circumstances should she
> stop taking the Haldol while still taking the Zoloft.
>
> The doctor did not do this.
>
> As her symptoms progressed, time and time again she was
> evaluated by psychiatrists who diagnosed her,
> accurately as psychotic.
>
> Finally she went to see Dr. Mohammed Saeed. He told her
> to stop taking the anti-psychotic Haldol, but that it
> was OK to keep taking the Zoloft.
>
> A short time after that, she began to believe she must
> kill her children herself to save their souls and then
> she must be executed herself because she had led them
> astray, being deranged about a verse in the Gospel of
> Luke. She then drowned all five of her children in the
> bathtub, which she believed at the time to be the
> morally correct thing to do, and then turned herself
> into the police with the specific desire that she be
> executed because it was 'better that she be killed that
> a single one of her little ones be led astray'.
>
> My conclusion:
>
> Dr. Mohammed Saeed should be convicted of negligent
> homicide and sentenced to life in prison.
>
> Pfizer Corporation, manufacturer of Zoloft, should be
> immediately dismantled and its board of directors sent
> to prison.
>
> Andrea Yates should be taken off Zoloft. If she returns
> to sanity, she should be released.
>
> That would be justice. Anything else is a psychotic
> delusion.
>
> - Jeff
>

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

🔗Afmmjr@...

3/15/2002 5:58:06 AM

In a message dated 3/15/02 12:18:43 AM Eastern Standard Time,
kraiggrady@... writes:

> .
>
> There is also the case of the real psychosis going on,
> blood equals justice.
>

Most drugs exacerbate conditions all ready present. I doubt Zoloft was
responsible for turning her into a killer. There are plenty of mentally ill
people in the world, but there are few that become killers. Even fewer of
the mentally ill would kill their own progeny, let alone all 5.

Likewise, Zoloft has plenty of other side effects, like uncontrollable
repeated orgasms for women (which is quite a painful reality for a women).
Pfizer actually voluntarily withdrew the antibiotic Trovan, telling the FDA
that there were 5 deaths associated with it, in advance of outside authority.
I know the product manager of that product and he is one of the most ethical
men I have ever known.

I have had the good fortune of not having had to use an antidepressant.
Certainly, for men, they can make one impotent. The only reason a person
accepts such a change in "reality" is to cope with living. Yates was already
seriously impaired and I think people have to face that a mother chose to
drown her own children methodically. I'm no Texan and would not want to
destroy every killer no matter what, but the jury obviously felt there was no
recourse but conviction to letting such a person back into a situation where
this could happen again in some variation.

Best, Johnny Reinhard

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

3/15/2002 4:55:38 PM

Johnny!
As you might remember the Russians were quite good of using such medications
to undo their "undesirables". Turning them into things they weren't before. None
of us have the whole story but at this time "insanity" never holds up. i think
in put in the position of a trial, i would not want a jury trail, preferring a
judge. Mental illness is even less understood than i think 20 years ago.
My father who worked with doctors heard more than one story of drugs that
were forced upon doctors that if they didn't prescribe them, it would result in
Malpractice.
Afmmjr@... wrote:

> In a message dated 3/15/02 12:18:43 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> kraiggrady@... writes:
>
> > .
> >
> > There is also the case of the real psychosis going on,
> > blood equals justice.
> >
>
> Most drugs exacerbate conditions all ready present. I doubt Zoloft was
> responsible for turning her into a killer. There are plenty of mentally ill
> people in the world, but there are few that become killers. Even fewer of
> the mentally ill would kill their own progeny, let alone all 5.
>
> Likewise, Zoloft has plenty of other side effects, like uncontrollable
> repeated orgasms for women (which is quite a painful reality for a women).
> Pfizer actually voluntarily withdrew the antibiotic Trovan, telling the FDA
> that there were 5 deaths associated with it, in advance of outside authority.
> I know the product manager of that product and he is one of the most ethical
> men I have ever known.
>
> I have had the good fortune of not having had to use an antidepressant.
> Certainly, for men, they can make one impotent. The only reason a person
> accepts such a change in "reality" is to cope with living. Yates was already
> seriously impaired and I think people have to face that a mother chose to
> drown her own children methodically. I'm no Texan and would not want to
> destroy every killer no matter what, but the jury obviously felt there was no
> recourse but conviction to letting such a person back into a situation where
> this could happen again in some variation.
>
> Best, Johnny Reinhard
>

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

🔗Afmmjr@...

3/15/2002 5:52:52 PM

In a message dated 3/15/02 8:02:02 PM Eastern Standard Time,
kraiggrady@... writes:

>
> Johnny!
> As you might remember the Russians were quite good of using such
> medications
> to undo their "undesirables".

Of course, there are no implications that Yates's doctor was trying to create
a monster.

Turning them into things they weren't before. None
of us have the whole story but at this time "insanity" never holds up.

Except that she got life in Texas. To me this translates as recognition of
insanity.

> in put in the position of a trial, i would not want a jury trail,
> preferring a
> judge. Mental illness is even less understood than i think 20 years ago.
>

Both my parents are mentally ill. I do have my share of anecdotal
experiences. My father stands by the doctors he has had from the Veterans
Administration (he's not 78). He was in the army for 4 years and had joined
the air force when I was born. Last year, over some whisky, he shared with
me that the thing he is proudest of is never having killed anyone. It got me
thinking (remember Son of Sam was killing in my neighborhood in Brooklyn).
At the gut level, one doesn't kill one's entire progeny as methodically as
Yates did, without a sense that she cannot be repaired. It is hard to see
how life imprisonment is better than execution on some level.

> My father who worked with doctors heard more than one story of drugs that
> were forced upon doctors that if they didn't prescribe them, it would
> result in
> Malpractice.
>

This is thuggery and should be treated as outright criminal. But I would
hesitate before nuking all drug companies, as I would the Hoosiers. No
matter how ill one gets, one does not take the life of another, including
one's own.

Best, Johnny Reinhard

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

🔗Gene W Smith <genewardsmith@...>

3/15/2002 10:17:00 PM

On 15 Mar 2002 15:40:12 -0000 metatuning@yahoogroups.com writes:
Afmmjr@... writes:

I'm no Texan and would not
> want to
> destroy every killer no matter what, but the jury obviously felt
> there was no
> recourse but conviction to letting such a person back into a
> situation where
> this could happen again in some variation.

It's hardly likely she would repeat, and even less likely in a mental
insitution, but this isn't what the jury is charged with doing. They are
supposed to decide if she was legally sane, or unable to tell right from
wrong. This they failed to do, and that's Texas for you. I was impressed
to find that Charles Krauthammer, hardly a liberal, saw that far.

🔗Afmmjr@...

3/17/2002 4:18:41 PM

In a message dated 3/17/02 4:12:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
genewardsmith@... writes:

> They are supposed to decide if she was legally sane,

The jury is not in the position to judge a person's sanity.

>

This is all they were charged with. The fact that she planned the murders
the night before, and that she called the police afterwards indicated to some
(e.g. the jury) that she knew what she did was wrong.

But Gene, I'm just giving opinion. best, Johnny Reinhard

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

🔗genewardsmith <genewardsmith@...>

3/17/2002 4:28:27 PM

--- In metatuning@y..., Afmmjr@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 3/17/02 4:12:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> genewardsmith@j... writes:
>
>
> > They are supposed to decide if she was legally sane,
>
> The jury is not in the position to judge a person's sanity.

They are in a position to judge guilt, but not sanity? How does that work?

🔗clumma <carl@...>

3/18/2002 1:17:14 PM

>I was impressed to find that Charles Krauthammer, hardly
>a liberal, saw that far.

Krauthammer hardly a liberal? This was the guy that
defended monetary reparations for black Americans
a few years back?

-Carl

🔗clumma <carl@...>

3/18/2002 1:18:43 PM

>They are in a position to judge guilt, but not sanity? How
>does that work?

What's sanity? There's no scientific definition that I'm
aware of. It's a social disorder, not a (directly, with
today's understanding of the mind) a mental one.

-Carl

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

3/18/2002 4:00:24 PM

Seems fair, more than liberal. The swiss did it and they are liberals

clumma wrote:

> >I was impressed to find that Charles Krauthammer, hardly
> >a liberal, saw that far.
>
> Krauthammer hardly a liberal? This was the guy that
> defended monetary reparations for black Americans
> a few years back?
>
> -Carl
>

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

🔗clumma <carl@...>

3/18/2002 4:34:03 PM

>Seems fair, more than liberal. The swiss did it and
>they are liberals

The Swiss did it for who?

All of Europe is liberals, as far as I can tell. Not
that I can, since I don't even know what a liberal is,
really. Or a conservative, for that matter.

Seems fair? Seems no better than slavery, to me. If
I really benefit from slavery and black people are
really hurt by it, I should be in jail and they'd be
far worse off than they are. Also, $$$ will not help
(yes, I know the fairness question, at least in terms
of civil law, doesn't depend on it helping).

Human history is so filled with people stomping each
other down, we might as well have a grand game of
euchre (speaking of Indiana).

In 1998 I was severely burglarized by people who were
black. Justice was never done, because in the place
where I was (a black ghetto in Oakland), property laws
could not be enforced (or at least, whitey couldn't
figure out how to). So shall I say I've paid my
reparation? Should we run around like this all day,
pointing fingers?

Those who are constantly mentioning race, and coming
up with this stuff (like reparations) are more racist
than I care to fathom.

Another good one: "We're all prejudiced, but not all
racist". Speak for yourself. If anything, I'm racist
but _not_ prejudiced. My race is one of the most
despicable of all, and as heroic as any. How should
that make me feel? It shouldn't, of course.

My .plan at IU was: "The most acute judges of the
witches, and even the witches themselves, were convinced
of the guilt of witchery. The guilt nevertheless was
non-existent. It is thus with all guilt." [Nietzsche]

-Carl

🔗paulerlich <paul@...>

3/20/2002 3:07:14 PM

--- In metatuning@y..., "clumma" <carl@l...> wrote:

> All of Europe is liberals, as far as I can tell.

maybe not for long:

http://slate.msn.com/?id=2063351