26 9 / 2011

"Has anybody been watching the debates lately? You’ve got a governor whose state is on fire denying climate change. It’s true. You’ve got audiences cheering at the prospect of somebody dying because they don’t have healthcare and booing a service member in Iraq because they’re gay. That’s not reflective of who we are,"

09 9 / 2011

tumbledore:

These are the top 10 of the top 25 psychiatric medications by number of U.S. prescriptions dispensed in 2009 as well as the percent change from 2005 according to IMS Health. Note that the total U.S. population rose approximately 4% from 2005 to 2009.

  1. Xanax, used for anxiety, up 29% 
  2. Lexapro, used for depression/anxiety, up 13%
  3. Ativan, used for anxiety/panic disorders, up 36%
  4. Zoloft, used for depression/anxiety/OCD/PTSD/PMDD, down 28%
  5. Prozac, used for depression/anxiety, down 9%
  6. Desyrel, used for depression/anxiety, N/A
  7. Cymbalta, used for depression/anxiety, up 237% 
  8. Seroquel, used for bipolar disorder/depression, up 88% 
  9. Effexor XR, used for depression/anxiety/panic disorder, down 13%
  10. Valium, used for anxiety/panic disorder, up 16%

“The biggest declines we see are drugs that have gone off-patent, including Wellbutrin (a decline of 73 percent in prescriptions) and Paxil (which didn’t even make it on this year’s list). Strattera — prescribed for ADHD — lost 42 percent of the prescriptions it had in 2005. And despite Zoloft’s strong showing in 4th place — down from 2nd place four years ago — it also lost 28 percent of its previous prescriptions.”

Doctors immediately discontinue prescribing drugs once they become unprofitable to pharmaceutical companies, meaning they are pushing drugs for personal financial (and sometimes sexual) gain at the expense of patients’ health. 

but I love my xanax and cymbalta, and man if I could get valium…

18 8 / 2011

azspot:

(via sarahlee310)

welcome to the lone star state

15 8 / 2011

Interview of Zbigniew Brzezinski, Le Nouvel Observateur [1998]

  • 1: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the National Security Adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?
  • 2: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
  • 1: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?
  • 2: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
  • 1: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?
  • 2: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
  • 1: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic [integrisme], having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
  • 2: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
  • 1: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated: Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
  • 2: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn't a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.